I 




Glass t/M 






lo-y^-M 



House No. 1750 



REPORT 



^\ass 



COMMISSION 



The Cost of Living-. 



f. U iJ|l 3 WITH THE COMPLIMENTS OF THE 

MASSACHUSETTS COMMISSION ON THE COST OF LIVING 




May, 1910. 



BOSTON: 

WEIGHT & POTTEE PEINTING CO., STATE PEINTEES, 

18 Post Office Squabe. 

1910. 



D. Of 0' 

mjg is 









<ftl)c iitomtncntoealtfy of Massachusetts, 



Boston, May 2, 1910. 
To the General Court of Massachusetts. 

In accordance with the provisions of chapter 134 of the 
Resolves of 1910, entitled, " An Act to create the Massachusetts 
Commission on the Cost of Living," we have the honor to 
transmit the following report. 



MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION 



ROBERT LUCE, Chairman. 
ALBION F. BEMIS. 
EDWARD F. McSWEENEY. 
MEDERIC J. LAPORTE. 
HENRY ABRAHAMS. 



F. Spencer Baldwin, Secretary. 



Act providing foe the Appointment of the 
Commission. 



Chapter 134, Acts of 1910. 

An Act to create the Massachusetts Commission on the Cost op 

Living. 
Be it enacted, etc., as follows: 

Section 1. A commission, which shall be known as the Massachusetts 
Commission on the Cost of Living, is hereby created to investigate thor- 
oughly the cost of living in this commonwealth. The commission shall 
report its findings and recommendations to the general court not later 
than the first day of May in the year nineteen hundred and ten. 

Section 2. It shall be the duty of said commission to inquire into 
the causes of the increased prices of the necessaries of life, as compared 
with wages and income, and to inquire into the direct and indirect effect 
of our present tariff laws upon wages, income and cost of living. 

Section 3. The members of the said commission shall be chosen with 
a view to their special knowledge of law, trade, labor and political econ- 
omy, and shall consist of five persons to be appointed by the governor 
with the consent of the council. 

Section 4. The commission shall have power to compel the attendance 
of witnesses and the production of books and papers, and shall, with 
the approval of the governor and council, have the right to travel. The 
commission may employ such clerical assistance as it deems necessary. 
The governor and council shall determine what compensation, if any, 
members of the commission shall receive. 

Section 5. A sum not exceeding fifteen thousand dollars may be ex- 
pended in carrying out the provisions of this act. 

Section 6. This act shall take effect upon its passage. [Approved 
February 28, 1910. 



CONTENTS 



r. 
ii. 



in. 

IV. 



VI. 



VII. 



VIII. 











PAGE 


Introductory statement, . . . . . . . .11 


Price statistics, . 








13 


A. Wholesale prices, 








13 


B. Retail prices, 








57 


Wages and hours of labor, 








73 


Chief items of expenditure, 








90 


A. Food, 








90 


1. Meat, 








92 


2. Fish, 








118 


3. Poultry, . 








121 


4. Butter, 








123 


5. Milk, 








125 


6. Eggs, 








127 


7. Vegetables, 








129 


8. Groceries, . 








131 


9. Recommendatioi 


concerning the J 


3ostoi 


i Market District 


133 


B. Rents, 








134 


C. Clothing, . 








148 


1. Wool and woolens, 






149 


2. Cotton and cotton goods, 






151 


3. Boots and shoes, 






155 


D. Fuel and light, .... 






161 


1. Coal, .....'■ 






161 


2. Oil, 






163 


3. Gas and electric light, 






164 


4. Slate in coal, 






165 


E. Sundries, ..... 






175 


F. Cold storage, .... 






175 


General analysis and classification, 






189 


A. Factors that determine the cost of livir 


g» 




189 


B. Causes of increase of cost of living, 






194 


Social wastage, ..... 






198 


A. War, 






198 


B. Cost of government, . 






208 


C. Crime, pauperism and insanity, . 






218 


D. Accident and disease, 






222 


E. Waste from fire, 






226 


F. Unemployment, 








232 


G. Education, 








235 


Individual wastage,. 








239 


A. Drink, 








239 


B. Luxury, . 








244 


C. Amusement, 








246 


D. Domestic waste, 








250 


Changes in supply, 








258 


A. Drain of population from the land, 






. 258 


B. Exhaustion of natural resources, 






. 264 


C. Production and distribution, 






. 282 


1. Transportation, . 






284 


2. Jobbers' and retailers' profits, 






293 


3. Distributive co-operation, 






322 


4 Advertising, 








332 



10 



CONTENTS. 



VIII. Changes in supply — Con. 

C. Production and distribution — Con. 

5. Adulteration, 

6. Package goods and short weights, 

D. The tariff, 

1 . Canada and the United States, 

2. Europe and the United States, 

3. Massachusetts and the tariff, 

E. The trusts, 

1. Sugar, 

2. Petroleum, 

3. Whiskey, . 

4. Iron and steel, . 

5. Tin plate, . 

6. Wheat and wool, 

7. Cattle and their products, 
Conclusion, 
The legal situation, 
Recommendation, . 

F. Trade unions and labor costs, 

1. The employers' side, . 

2. The employees' side, . 

3. Conclusion, 

G. Legislation, 

1. National legislation, . 

2. Massachusetts legislation, 
IX. Changes in demand, 

A. Population, 

B. Standard of living, 

C. Extravagance, . 
X. Changes in value of money, . 

A. The theory of money and prices, 

B. Gold production, 

C. The growth of credit, 

D. The effect of interest, 

E. The future of money and prices, 
XL Effects of increase of cost of living, 

XII. Conclusion, .... 

A. Findings of the commission, 

B. Recommendations of the commission, 
Appendix : — 

A. Public markets in Boston, , 

B. Family budgets, 

C. Waste of health, 

D. Massachusetts farm produce, 

E. Current explanations of high prices, 

F. Food prices in Canada and the United States 

G. Prices of trust-controlled commodities, 
H. Statistics of crime, pauperism and insanity, 
I. Statistics of agriculture in Massachusetts, 
J. Statistics of meat supply, . 
K. Market statistics, .... 
L. Articles purchased in Boston and weighed and 

State Department of Weights and Measures, 
M. Savings and co-operative banks, 
N. Miscellaneous records of prices, . 
O. Comparative expenditures at State institutions 



measured by the 



PAGE 

337 
340 
350 
353 
379 
384 
389 
391 
400 
405 
410 
420 
423 
425 
426 
428 
435 
438 
441 
468 
471 
474 
476 
480 
491 
491 
494 
498 
501 
501 
508 
513 
515 
517 
521 
529 
529 
532 

537 
571 
606 
627 
635 
641 
648 
709 
719 
726 
731 

739 
741 
742 
749 



COST OF LIVING 



i. 

INTKODUCTOKY STATEMENT. 



The commission was appointed March 9, and organized 
for work March 10. The instructions embodied in the re- 
solve creating the commission called for a thorough investiga- 
tion of the cost of living in this Commonwealth, an inquiry into 
the causes of the increased prices of the necessaries of life as 
compared with wages and incomes, and into the direct and in- 
direct effect of our present tariff laws upon wages, income and 
cost of living. These instructions, in brief, demanded an ex- 
amination of the facts regarding the recent movement of prices, 
wages and incomes, and of the causes of such changes as may 
have taken place, with especial reference to the influence of the 
tariff. 

The short time allowed for the investigation, through the re- 
quirement that the commission should report not later than 
May 1, prevented any extended original research. The com- 
mission has made use of all existing material bearing on the 
question under investigation which "could be assembled, has in- 
stituted such further inquiries as were possible and practicable 
under the circumstances, and has engaged qualified experts to 
make special studies of certain phases of the subject of inquiry. 
The commission has held seven public hearings, at which rep- 
resentative wholesale and retail dealers, acquainted with the 
market conditions and price changes of the leading commodities 
of common consumption, have been examined with reference to 
the changes in price during recent years. Opportunity has also 
been given to all persons who expressed a desire to be heard to 
submit their views to the commission. The reports of these 



12 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

hearings are too voluminous to print in this report, but com- 
plete stenographic minutes have been deposited in the State 
Library. 

The commission desires to express its appreciation of the 
courteous assistance that has been given in the pursuit of its in- 
quiries by the Honorable Chairman and Secretary of the United 
States Senate Committee on Wages and Prices of Commodities, 
by various officials of the national government and of the Do- 
minion of Canada, heads of numerous departments of the govern- 
ment of this Commonwealth, mayors of cities, and many other 
persons who have furnished the commission with valuable in- 
formation. Acknowledgment should also be made of the ex- 
pert assistance given to the commission by Prof. J. W. Jenks 
of Cornell University, Prof. Ellen H. Richards of the Massa- 
chusetts Institute of Technology, Profs. William P. Brooks 
and Alexander E. Cance of the Massachusetts Agricultural Col- 
lege, and Dr. E. M. Hartwell, secretary of the statistics depart- 
ment of the city of Boston. 

It also desires to express its appreciation of the work of its 
secretary, Prof. E. Spencer Baldwin. To his untiring labors it 
owes no small share of what has been accomplished, and it found 
invaluable both his familiarity with the subject and his sound 
judgment. 

In the report of the commission, which is herewith submitted, 
the facts as to the movement of wholesale prices, retail prices 
and wages are first presented in considerable detail. The causes 
of the changes thus set forth are then discussed at length. 
Einally, the effects of the changes are considered and possible 
remedies through legislative or other action are suggested. The 
main findings, conclusions and recommendations of the commis- 
sion are summarized briefly in the final chapter. 



1910.1 HOUSE — No. 1750. 13 



II. 

PEICE STATISTICS. 



A. WHOLESALE PRICES. 

The first task in an investigation into the increase of the cost 
of living is manifestly to determine the facts as to the extent of 
the advance in prices. In collecting and presenting price 
statistics it is necessary to distinguish between wholesale and 
retail prices. The former are more sensitive to industrial and 
commercial changes; they furnish a more accurate measure 
of the movement of values, whether upward or downward. The 
latter respond more sluggishly to influences tending to advance 
or to lower prices; they afford, however, a better indication of 
the increase or the decrease of the actual cost of living to the 
consumer. It is easy to understand why retail prices move 
more slowly than wholesale prices. Competition operates less 
effectively upon retail than upon wholesale prices. To be 
sure, when wholesale prices are advancing, retail dealers are 
fairly alert to take advantage of the change, and mark up prices 
to their customers. But, on the other hand, they do not at 
once lower their prices when wholesale prices drop; they post- 
pone such action for a time, in order to get rid of stock on 
hand or in anticipation of a possible advance of wholesale 
prices. It is the level of retail prices, however, that directly 
concerns the consumer. 

In exhibiting the movement of prices over a period of time, 
the method of index numbers is usually employed. The nature 
of this method is briefly this. A number of commodities is 
chosen, and the total price of specified quantities of these 
articles is ascertained for a given day or averaged for a certain 
period. The price numbers thus computed are in some tables 
of index numbers used without further change. Usually, how- 



14 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

ever, such numbers are reduced to percentages of 100 as the 
base of comparison. The total price at a chosen date, or the 
general average for a specified period, is taken as the base and 
represented by 100, and the price figures are quoted in terms 
of this base, upward and downward, as prices change. For 
example, if 100 articles be chosen, and the total price of 1 
pound of each be $10 on January 1, then, taking that figure as 
the base, or 100, the index number for February 1 would be 
110, if the total prices of the 100 articles were found to be $11 
on that date, and it would be 90, if the total prices were $9, 
and so on. 

For wholesale prices in the United States there are several 
series of index numbers available. The best known are those 
published by Dun's and Bradstreet's commercial agencies. The 
former cover the period 1860-1907, having been discontinued 
in May of the latter year. The Bradstreet series extends from 
1892 to the present time. Recently a continuation of the Dun 
numbers has been computed by Prof. J. Pease Norton of Yale. 
This new series is known as the " Gibson numbers," being 
named after a Wall Street financial bureau which has borne the 
expense of the compilation. There is also the series published 
by the United States Bureau of Statistics of Labor, extending 
from 1890 to 1908. Prior to 1890 the index numbers of the 
Aldrich report of 1893 furnish a record, running back to 1840. 
In examining these price records for the purpose of the present 
inquiry it will be sufficient to go back only as far as the year 
1890, since the investigation is concerned with the recent ad- 
vance of the cost of living, and not with the course of price 
movements in general. 

The Dun series of index numbers is designed to give the cost 
of the necessities of life for the individual. The numbers are 
based on wholesale quotations, the figure for each commodity 
being multiplied by the annual per capita consumption, in order 
to give its proper weight in the aggregate. The figures are 
given in dollars and cents, not being reduced to a percentage 
basis on the scale of 100. About 350 articles are represented, 
but no details are given as to the method of calculating the an- 
nual per capita consumption upon which the figures are based. 
This series has been criticized as giving too great importance to 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



15 



food products through the method of weighting the figures. 
The figures are published each month, but July 1 of each year 
is stated by the compilers to be the best index of the general 
state of prices. The July quotations are accordingly given in 
the table below : — 

Dun's Index Numbers of Wholesale Prices for July 1, 1890-1906. 



Year. 


Bread 

Stuffs. 


Meats. 


Dairy and 
Garden 
Products. 


Other 
Food. 


Total 
Food. 


Clothing. 


Grand 

Total. 


1890, . 


$14.87 


$8.04 


$10.71 


$9.75 


$43.37 


$17.26 


$91.56 


1891, 








19.78 


9.22 


12.46 


9.34 


50.80 


16.50 


96.10 


1S92, 








17.43 


8.70 


10.40 


8.73 


45.23 


15.65 


89.99 


1893, 








14.96 


10.14 


11.71 


9.19 


46.00 


15.87 ' 


90.62 


1894, 








15.12 


9.39 


10.39 


8.48 


43.38 


13.86 


83.30 


1895, 








14.76 


8.62 


9.87 


8.69 


41.94 


15.32 


81.51 


1896, 








10.50 


7.06 


7.87 


8.53 


33.96 


13.60 


74.31 


1897, 








10.59 


7.53 


8.71 


7.89 


34.72 


13.81 


72.46 


1898, 








12.78 


7.69 


9.44 


8.83 


38.74 


14.66 


77.76 


1899, 








13.48 


7.99 


10.97 


9.16 


41.60 


15.02 


85.23 


1900, 








14.90 


8.91 


10.90 


9.48 


44.19 


16.32 


91.41 


1901, 








14.90 


9.43 


11.03 


9.09 


44.45 


15.10 


91.51 


1902, 








20.53 


11.63 


12.56 


8.75 


53.47 


15.53 


101.91 


1903, 








17.47 


9.27 


13.08 


9.19 


49.01 


17.14 


99.46 


1904, 








18.24 


9.03 


10.65 


10.41 


48.33 


16.51 


97.19 


1905, 








18.83 


8.61 


9 98 


9.92 


- 


17.99 


98.31 


1906, 








17.92 


9.68 


12.59 


9.65 


- 


19.18 


105.22 


1907, 








- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


109.00 l 


1908, 








- 


- 




- 


- 


- 


107.002 


1910, 








- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


- 


116. 00 3 



1 Last Dun number, May 1, 1907. 2 Gibson number, July, 1908. 

3 Gibson number, February 19, 1910. 



The increase of the last number for February, 1910, over 
the lowest number in the series, that for 1897, is 60 per cent. ; 
the increase of the last number over the average for the ten 
years 1890-99 is 35 per cent. 

The Bradstreet series gives the totals of the prices per pound 
of 96 articles, quarterly and monthly, since January 1, 1892. 
In the following table quarterly quotations are given for the 
entire series : — 



16 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Bradstreet's Index Numbers of Wholesale Prices, Quarterly, 1892-1910. 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
July 1, 
Oct. 1, 



1892. 



18S3. 



$8.1382 
7.9776 
7.3829 
7.6089 



Jan. 1, 7.8317 

Apr. 1, 7.8395 

July 1 7.2869 

Oct. 1, 7.1717 

1894. 

Jan. 1, 6.9391 

Apr. 1, 6.6660 

Julyl, 6.5770 

Oct. 1, 6.5566 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
Julyl, 
Oct. 1, 



1895. 



6.8220 
5.9722 
6.4204 
6.5241 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
July 1, 
Oct. 1, 



1896. 



6.3076 
5.8691 
5.7019 
5.7712 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
July 1, 
Oct. 1, 



1897. 



6.1164 
6.0460 
5.8537 
6.4477 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
July 1, 
Oct. 1, 



1898. 



6.5784 
6.4286 
6.5820 
6.6962 



1899. 

Jan. 1 6.8020 

Apr. 1, 6.8786 

Julyl, 7.0918 

Oct. 1, 7.6396 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
Julyl, 
Oct. 1, 



1900. 



8.0171 
8.1275 
7.7215 
7.7507 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
July 1, 
Oct. 1, 



1901. 



7.5673 
7.5263 
7.5151 
7.7276 



1902. 

Jan. 1, $7.6604 

Apr. 1, 7.7838 

Julyl, 7.8380 

Oct. 1 7.9924 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
July 1, 
Oct. 1, 



1903. 



8.0789 
8.1247 
7.8706 
7.9083 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
July 1, 
Oct. 1, 



1904. 



7.9885 
7.9690 
7.6318 
7.921g 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
July 1, 
Oct. 1, 



1905. 



8.0827 
7.9996 
7.9160 
8.2298 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
Julyl, 
Oct. 1, 



1906. 



8.3289 
8.2987 
8.2835 
8.5580 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
July 1, 
Oct. 1, 



1907. 



8.9172 
8.9640 
9.0409 
8.8506 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
July 1, 
Oct. 1, 



1908. 



8.2949 
8.0650 
7.8224 
8.0139 



Jan. 1, 
Apr. 1, 
Julyl, 
Oct. 1, 
Nov. 1, 
Dec. 1, 



Jan. 1, 
Feb. 1, 
Mar. 1, 



1909. 



1910. 



8.2631 
8.3157 
8.4573 
8.7478 
8.9635 
9.1262 



9.2310 
9.0730 
9.1113 



1892 
1893 
1894. 
1895 
1896 
1897 
1898 
1899 
1900 



Annual Averages of Bradstreet's Index Numbers. 

















$7.78 
7.53 
6.68 
6.43 
5.91 
6.12 
6.57 
7.21 
7.88 


1901, 
1902, 
1903, 
1904, 
1905, 
1906, 
1907, 
1908, 
1909, 















$7.57 
7.88 
7.94 
7.92 
8.10 
8.42 
8.90 
8.01 
8.51 



The Bradstreet series is the only one that gives index num- 
bers practically to date. All the index numbers show an 
advance of prices to 1907 as the high point, and a falling off 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 17 

in 1908. The Bradstreet table shows that the 1908 decline 
reached its low mark in June, and that the advance which set 
in then reached its high point January 1 of 1910. The 
average for 1909 exceeds that for 1908 by 6 1 / 4 per cent. The 
average for the three months of the current year is higher than 
that for 1907. The advance represented by the high point of 
January 1, 1910, over the low mark of 1896, is 61 per cent. ; 
the advance of the January 1 quotation over the average for 
the years 1892-99 is 36.3 per cent. 

The index numbers compiled since 1892 by the United States 
Bureau of Statistics of Labor show the wholesale prices for 
each year from 1890 to 1908. About 260 commodities are 
represented in this table. The base of the series is the average 
wholesale price for each commodity for the ten years 1890-99. 
The following table gives the index numbers of the Bureau for 
selected classes of commodities from 1890 to 1908: — 



18 



COST OF LIVING 



[May, 



'sat^ipommoQ 



0)NrtiorH«i'*N'*sioooiffloaimiaoo 



■pOOJ 83BI8Ay 









lOMONHNMHTfNMOOlOOOOONW 



•Bp3U 

-a^Bj^ Sniping 
puB iaqrani 



oo-*ooo5coT-<-^tiTtHoooor^t^oO'*it~-i~-^H05^H 



•S3UT 

-tjsiujtijj; 8gnoji 



HNU59HU)OOOOHH»NONrtOOO 
hhOOOOIOIOOOOOhhhhOhhh 



•seoqg 



SCOMO(SOOO>N!D(OC>«XO'rtNr-HOFH 
OOOOlOlOOsafflfflffllSOOONIMN 



■p«o 



OOM«»M03N050>0'*IN'*lfil-*(NO>WrH 

OOWfflONOWMOOONWOOOOOOOo' 
OlOOOOlOOfflOOfflOHHMCCCCMMCO 



MOlrHlflOONTtlN-KDOSO' 



I CO t~ 1-H •■*< CO 



•seo^oj 



•B8X 



CONONOHOffiNOOOSTllNOirtNOOO' 

^o'(BON* <m' i-H U. 
'OOOOOSOOOMN 



1 OS O O OS OS OS OS < 



!OCC»NON»"*CqO»N(0(0»'t«HM 



•88 5 00 



•jBSng 



iO05->S<CNO>t^.iO«OOC0t»05l>.TtiOJCN100O00 

)005t^.CV5»C^lMOOTH«0'<tlT-(0-HOTti|>!-^' 

"lHHOO>fflOH(SOO 



wooo«oooo»oOi 



'IK 



eo->*iici05ooa>^HCNcco3t^cNieNicNit^cooO'-(03 

00000«»0!«OiOOhhOhh(i5N 



•J9wn a 



■>*f^HTtlCO<MlrtCCT-IO0t>O^t^i-lt^-*O0^H>f5^H 
OCOCO-HCMTjHCNlTtHOlO' 

OHHNOaoooooooi 



•s33a 



rt0^iOU50Mfl!0®NNNMONIMNO 



0)00NN0>00Ote'*NOOO«l<0'll00MO> 



•qsitf 



100>ON!ONCO®NO<DM010^IOOOO*0 



•sn^ag 



•jnoi^j ^aqM 



OSCDcMCCCOTjtCM'— lOfflW^Nf I Tt< ON 00 SO 00 

Olfl^'oJNTtiHOoJNOONiSNUilNtOOOOO 
NNOOONWO^OOOOOOOOOOKMNOlOiH 



•SfJOJ 



•j^a 



oh'JiiohonoO'*'*noO'*ojooim» 



iC00O-^00O0000Tt<«0'«±i?<SC0t>.O0i<Ni 



,.)0>010iO)01C50>0000(_ _ 
00000000000000000000O5O2OJO5O5OSO5O5O3 






1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



19 



The advances shown by the preceding table are somewhat 
smaller than those indicated by the Dim and Bradstreet num- 
bers. The increase of the 1908 figure over the average for the 
ten years 1890-99 is 22.8 per cent. ; the increase of the same 
figure over the low point of 1897 is 36.9 per cent. It may be 
noted, in explaining this difference, that the proportion of food 
articles to the total is smaller in the Labor Bureau tables than 
in the others. 

In the general movement of wholesale prices from 1890 
onward, as shown in all the tables, four features are strongly 
marked: first, a decline to the low point in 1896 or 1897; 
second, a rise during the next decade to the high point in 1907 ; 
third, another decline continuing for about a year; fourth, an 
upward reaction, beginning in the latter half of 1908 and cul- 
minating in the early months of 1910. 

The best record of British wholesale prices is the series com- 
piled by Mr. Augustus Sauerbeck, published annually in the 
" Journal of the Royal Statistical Society." The tables include 
45 articles. The base of comparison is the average price for the 
years 1867-77. In the following table the Sauerbeck prices 
for various commodities are given, the selection being made 
with a view to comparison with the American prices given in 
the United States Bureau of Labor reports : — 



Sauerbeck's Index Numbers of English Wholesale Prices, . 


1887-1909 






Meat. 


3 
O 

<x> 




si 

to 

3 

m 


1 

o 
O 




73 
<B 
O 

O 


"3 
o 
O 


u 

si 

5 


a 

O 

O 


"3 
o 


§ 

IP 

> 

< 


in 

.2 

<» o 

spa 

M 


YEAR. 


pq 


1 


1887, 

1888 

1889 

1890 

1891 

1892 

1893 

1894 

1895 

1896 


72 
78 
78 
76 
80 
76 
78 
74 
74 
68 


83 

•77 
83 
81 
75 
92 
96 
85 
71 
67 


61 
65 
63 
63 
72 
61 
54 
48 
50 
54 


82 
80 
82 
80 
85 
86 
85 
78 
74 
78 


52 

57 
69 
54 
57 
58 
62 
48 
43 
46 


113 

96 
114 
123 
118 
113 
123 
117 
115 
100 


53 
50 
50 
51 
56 
51 
53 
47 
47 
46 


73 
69 
69 
60 
79 
60 
56 
60 
68 
47 


73 
75 

80 
86 
86 
84 
89 
75 
68 
68 


94 
87 
84 
81 
81 
81 
81 
78 
84 
84 


62 
62 
66 
67 
52 
46 
51 
42 
43 
48 


72 
72 
82 
76 
70 
61 
60 
55 
57 
62 


75 
73 

77 
73 
72 
66 
64 
62 


72 
72 
72 
68 
68 
63 
62 
61 



20 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Sauerbeck's Index Numbers, etc 




Concluded. 












Meat. 


u 

3 
O 

1 


i 

3 

« 


i 

3° 

m 


1 

6 




CO 

<D 

s 
s 


1 
D 


i 


d 
3 
o 
O 


1 


Average Food. 

Average All 
Commoditiea. 


YEAR. 


"8 

pq 




1897, 


72 


85 


65 


75 


39 


86 


45 


61 


72 


84 


43 


59 


65 


62 


1898 


72 


87 


72 


76 


40 


78 


46 


70 


76 


84 


37 


64 


68 


64 


1899 


80 


77 


58 


82 


44 


75 


50 


60 


84 


84 


40 


83 


65 


68 


1900 


84 


85 


60 


82 


46 


74 


49 


67 


107 


87 


61 


76 


69 


75 


1901 


84 


94 


58 


84 


38 


67 


40 


67 


91 


87 


53 


62 


67 


70 


1902 


94 


92 


56 


82 


30 


64 


38 


59 


84 


87 


54 


72 


67 


69 


1903 


84 


85 


59 


80 


36 


63 


41 


72 


75 


87 


67 


78 


66 69 


1904, 


84 


75 


62 


82 


44 


72 


43 


77 


74 


87 


73 


77 


68 


70 


1905 


80 


88 


62 


86 


47 


74 


40 


56 


70 


84 


57 


84 


69 


72 


1906 


80 


94 


58 


88 


36 


73 


40 


57 


75 


94 


66 


87 


69 


77 


1907, 


84 


87 


63 


86 


39 


67 


47 


75 


90 


97 


73 


88 


72 


80 


1908 


90 


83 


69 


91 


43 


62 


46 


69 


82 


91 


64 


76 


72 


73 


1909 


90 


94 


75 


90 


45 


67 


47 


56 


80 


93 


70 


87 


73 


74 


Per cent, increase over low 
point 


32.4 


40.3 


38.9 


15.4 


—2.2 


—33.0 


2.2 


19.1 


17.7 


10.7 


45.8 


40.3 


17.7 


21.3 


Average 1890-99, l 


75.0 


81.6 


60.0 


80.0 


49.0 


105.0 


49.0 


62.0 


79.0 


82.0 


47.0 


65.0 


68.5 


66.0 


Per cent, increase over 
average 1890-99, 1 . 


20.0 


15.2 


25.0 


12.5 


—8.2 


—36.2 


-4.1 


-9.7 


1.3 


13.4 


48.9 


33.8 


6.6 


12.1 



1 It should be noted that the average for 1890-99, from -which the percentages of increase are 
calculated, is simply the average of the index numbers for the ten years, and that the index num- 
bers themselves were computed on the average prices of the period 1866-77, taken as the base, 
or 100. Therefore, the percentages of increase thus obtained do not show accurately the advance 
of prices over the 1890-99 level alone. 

The increase of the 1909 average over the average of 1890-99 
is 12.1 per cent. ; the increase over the low point of 1896 is 21.3 
per cent. These increases may be compared with the advance 
of 22.8 per cent, in the American Bureau of Labor wholesale 
prices in 1908 over the average for 1890-99, and that of 36.9 
per cent, over the low point of 1896. It appears from this 
comparison that the rates of increase in the United States have 
been about double those in England. It should be borne in 
mind, however, that, as the English and the American numbers 
were computed on different bases, the comparison is not con- 
clusive. 

Corresponding commodities have been selected from the Labor 
Bureau and the Sauerbeck tables, so far as this was possible, in 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 21 

order to facilitate detailed comparisons. This could not be 
done, however, in all cases, because many commodities are listed 
in the Bureau of Labor tables which are not found in the Sauer- 
beck, and in other cases there is a different classification. 

A general similarity in the course of prices in the United 
States and England from 1890 to the present time is shown by 
the tables. In both countries from 1890 to 1896 or 1897 prices 
fell ; then they began to advance, and continued with slight in- 
terruption to rise for the next ten years. The earlier decline 
was somewhat more pronounced in the United States ; also, the 
later advance was more rapid and extensive in this country, 
particularly in the case of food products. The particular com- 
modities which show a greater relative increase in the United 
States are: butter, which has risen three times as fast as in 
England ; meat, which has increased twice as fast ; potatoes ; 
and coal. Shoes have risen in the United States more than 
three times as fast as leather in England ; Sauerbeck's tables 
give no quotations for shoes. 

The depression that took place in the United States in 
1903 and 1904, notably in food products, was not paralleled in 
England. 

It may also be noted that, while in England the price ad- 
vance was general for all commodities, the advance in food 
stuffs was somewhat less rapid than that for others. In the 
United States the opposite was true; food products rose more 
rapidly than other commodities. In England, food products 
were barely 5 per cent, higher in 1908 than the average for 
the period 1890-99, and were actually 6 per cent, below the 
high prices of the early 90's. In the United States, food prod- 
ucts in 1908 were over 20 per cent, higher than the average 
of 1890-99, and were. about 5 per cent, higher than the highest 
point reached in the early 90's. Of the individual food com- 
modities, beef shows the largest rate of increase' in both 
countries, being 16.7 higher in 1908 than the average of 
1890-99 in England, and 48.2 per cent, higher in the United 
States. It should be observed, also, that the average of food 
products is lowered considerably by the inclusion of sugar, 
coffee and tea, since these commodities all show substantial 
decreases in England, and the last two in the United States. 



22 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



The index numbers published by the London " Economist " 
take as a base the average price of the six years 1845-50, as 
100. The index number is the total of all prices of 50 odd 
commodities, estimated on this basis. No allowance is made 
for the relative importance of different commodities. 



London "Economist" Index Numbers, End of December, 1890-1909. 



1890 : 
1891 
1892 
1893 
1894 
1895 
1896 
1897 



1900 
1901 



2,241 
2,133 
2,120 
2,082 
1,923 
1,999 
1,946 
1,890 
1,918 
2,145 
2,125 
1,948 



1902 


. 2,003 


1903, .... 


. 2,197 


1904 


. 2,136 


1905 


. 2,342 


1906 


. 2,499 


1907, .... 


. 2,310 


1908, .... 


. 2,197 


1909 


. 2,390 


1910 (Jan.), . 


. 2,373 


1910 (Feb.), . 


. 2,396 



Average, 1890-99 2,040 



The increase shown by the preceding table is somewhat greater 
than that indicated by the Sauerbeck figures. The " Econo- 
mist " numbers show the low year in England to be 1897, 
instead of 1896. It should be remembered, however, that the 
" Economist " figures are for December 31 of each year. The 
increase February, 1910, over the average price, 1890-99, 
is 17 per cent., and over the low point, 1897, 26.7 per cent., 
as contrasted with 12.1 per cent, and 21.3 per cent, respectively 
as shown by the Sauerbeck table. 

Index numbers of wholesale prices for Canada are published 
in the " Labour Gazette " of the Canadian Department of 
Labour, February, 1910. Price records are given for 225 com- 
modities. The index numbers are computed from yearly aver- 
ages of monthly quotations of wholesale prices. The following 
table gives the index numbers for selected groups of com- 
modities : — 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



23 



Canadian Department of Labour Index Numbers of Wholesale Prices, 

1890-1909. 



Year. 


"c3 
> 

« 

.2 

6 


O 
>> 

a 
H 

a 


00 

bO 


m 
a 


h 

O 


03 

a 

13 
.2 
"3 

3 

CO 

O 

w 


03 

1 

CO 
TJ 



a 

03 

8 
pq 


T3 
O 

o 

> 
< 


03 

o 
S 

-a 
<6 

£> 

If 
u 

0) 
> 
< 


1890 


106.0 


101.0 


119.5 


104.0 


118.0 


101.0 


100.5 


109.7 


107.1 


1891 








101.7 


100.5 


113.5 


106.5 


121.0 


99.0 


100.0 


108.6 


106.0 


1892 








122.9 


102.6 


101.0 


106.0 


108.0 


99.2 


99.0 


108.1 


105.5 


1893 








110.0 


127.0 


110.0 


111.0 


88.0 


99.4 


99.0 


109.2 


106.6 


1894 








88.9 


104.0 


93.3 


104.0 


79.0 


99.6 


98.5 


93.8 


95.3 


1895 








91.4 


93.0 


95.0 


94.0 


93.0 


99.8 


98.5 


93.3 


95.0 


1896 








82.3 


82.5 


89.0 


90.5 


91.0 


100.0 


99.0 


87.0 


90.6 


1897 








92.0 


92.0 


78.0 


90.5 


106.0 


101.0 


99.3 


91.7 


94.1 


1898 








101.0 


99.5 


92.5 


94.0 


108.8 


101.0 


99.3 


99.2 


99.4 


1899 








103.0 


95.5 


107.0 


102.0 


86.0 


100.8 


103.3 


98.7 


99.7 


1900 








103.0 


112.0 


103.8 


109.0 


88.0 


109.5 


108.0 


103.2 


104.8 


1901 








111.0 


128.0 


98.0 


103.0 


87.0 


107.5 


111.8 


105.4 


106.6 


1902 








118.5 


133.0 


111.2 


107.0 


88.0 


109.5 


113.0 


111.5 


111.5 


1903 








113.5 


126.0 


111.0 


109.0 


91.0 


109.8 


115.0 


110.1 


110.8 


1904 








113.0 


107.0 


144.0 


107.0 


115.0 


115.0 


117.0 


119.2 


116.9 


1905 








114.6 


122.0 


129.0 


115.5 


116.0 


114.5 


120.0 


121.4 


118.8 


1906 








120.0 


140.5 


126.5 


120.5 


95.0 


114.8 


124.0 


120.5 


120.2 


1907 








128.0 


140.0 


152.5 


132.0 


108.0 


114.5 


128.6 


132.1 


129.0 


1908 








129.2 


134.0 


148.0 


137.0 


122.0 


115.5 


133.0 


134.0 


131.2 


1909 




} over 1cm 




141.0 


152.0 


171.0 


134.0 


127.0 


112.0 


133.0 


145.0 


138.6 


Per 

po 


cent. increas< 
int, 


71.3 


84.2 


92.1 


48.1 


39.6 


12.0 


34.3 


66.7 


53.0 



The increase in 1909 over the average for the years 1890-99 
is 38.6 per cent.; the increase over the low year 1897 is 53 
per cent. These increases are much higher than the advances 
shown by the United States Bureau of Labor figures for Ameri- 
can prices, which are 21.3 per cent, and 36.9 per cent, respec- 
tively for the advance over the average and over the low point. 

It is not possible to obtain from existing material a contin- 
uous record of the movement of wholesale prices in Germany 
and France from 1890 to the present period. For Germany 



24 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Dr. A. Soetbeer's record of Hamburg prices extends only to 
1891. Dr. J. Conrad has also computed price tables from tbe 
Hamburg records, but does not give index numbers for tbe 
wbole list. For France tbe most complete table of prices is 
tbat given in tbe Aldricb report of 1893; tbe figures are not, 
however, reduced to index numbers. Recently tbe United States 
Department of Labor has computed tables of index numbers 
which throw light on the movement of wholesale prices in 
Germany and France during the decade 1899-1908. 1 The fol- 
lowing tables give these index numbers for selected commod- 
ities : — 





Index Numbers of German Wholesale Prices, 


1899-1908. 






© 


Is 




§"" 


i 


a 
S • 


i 


§i 


Year. 


o 

ST 
£ © 


H 

PQ 
*> 

o3 

M 
g 
>- 

O 


m « © 

155 


to| 


Ph . 

So 


T!'© 
©."£ 

ll 
J J 


O 


gpq 

© g 
O© 

O » 

^T ©^ 
"o > a 




ffl 


fe 


s 


Ph 


TO 


Ph 


O 


£ 


1899, 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


1900, 






102.4 


95.9 


102.8 


96.8 


104.8 


103.2 


123.9 


92.7 


1901, 






104.0 


104.5 


101.2 


98.6 


110.7 


99.5 


100.0 


76.4 


1902, 






99.9 


105.0 


104.7 


92.2 


108.2 


98.2 


106.9 


84.5 


1903, 






103.8 


98.6 


111.3 


101.8 


102.7 


104.5 


127.1 


98.8 


1904, 






105.5 


106.4 


113.5 


95.0 


80.3 


97.7 


131.4 


98.2 


1905, 






109.1 


104.1 


118.6 


98.2 


88.1 


92.3 


122.3 


103.2 


1906, 






111.3 


109.5 


127.4 


98.2 


73.8 


99.5 


145.2 


115.0 


1907, 






108.9 


128.2 


126.5 


107.3 


77.4 


100.5 


162.2 


115.5 


1908, 






114.2 


127.3 


119.9 


106.8 


81.8 


102.7 


134.0 


104.4 



Index Numbers of French Wholesale Prices, 1899-1908. 







< 


f> 


■ 
PI 

03 
P4 


T3 
© 

a 


J 








© 

if 


Is 


o3 


TS 


3 


© 

s 






Year. 


< 

u 

1 

3 


.8 

' to 

3W 


w 

*®'§ 

©n 
PqPh 

- © 

11 


CI 
O 

PQ 

© O 

.a bo 


s 


3, 

s 9 
© o 


A 
o 

O 
PI 

S 
* 


Pi 

03 

*H 

PI 
© 

o 




ffl 


PE| 


S 


Ph 


CQ 


Ph 


o 


£ 


1899, 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


1900 








97.9 


98.2 


98.6 


91.6 


99.4 


102.0 


124.8 


92.3 


1901 








87.3 


96.1 


102.1 


89.6 


95.5 


89.6 


111.8 


78.9 


1902 








82.2 


103.6 


96.5 


85.9 


90.2 


92.9 


103.8 


87.1 


1903 








76.4 


111.8 


96.5 


90.1 


78.0 


106.8 


113.2 


95.2 


1904 








82.2 


112.7 


95.8 


91.7 


58.8 


101.2 


112.9 


96.2 


1905 








77.6 


113.8 


93.7 


92.1 


63.0 


93.8 


110.5 • 


100.4 


1906 








89.1 


112.8 


88.8 


94.7 


54.9 


99.2 


121.9 


109.5 


1907 








90.3 


117.5 


100.7 


104.4 


54.7 


109.3 


142.5 


114.2 


1908 








90.3 


112.1 


103.5 


105.5 


57.8 


111.9 


149.0 


94.9 



See Senate Document, 349, Sixty-First Congress. 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



25 



In this connection the index numbers for British and Ameri- 
can prices, presented in the same report, afford a basis for in- 
teresting comparisons. 

Index Numbers of American Wholesale Prices, 1899-1908. 





Si 

§5 

is 


u 

a 


Meat. 


.2 

(9 

01 


T5 


T3 

a 


i 

a 


- 0) 


YEAR. 


u 5 


<x> 

> 
Is 

CO <u 


>3 

in 
o 


'iio 

J2ce 

^ 03 


S 

o 
Q 

i 

a>*3 


1 
3 

C3 

u 

s 


1? 




3-0 __ 
~Ph [J 




s fi * 


3£ 


»s 


5^ 


8^ 

03 


oJ3 


03 


5 3 






3 W 


i>GG 


<iO! 


3 


'^° 


3 


■g.2 


^JS 


o^Ph 




pq 


ft 


ft 


s 


PQ 


P3 


GO 


Ph 


o 


£ 


1899, 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


1900, 






105.0 


99.0 


96.3 


102.2 


128.9 


90.3 


108.3 


108.0 


146.2 


112.5 


1901. 






101.9 


97.7 


94.3 


94.9 


152.8 


90.3 


102.5 


94.7 


131.2 


106.3 


1902, 






116.3 


103.1 


116.3 


103.8 


184.0 


92.1 


90.4 


92.8 


135.9 


106.3 


1903, 






111.0 


106.1 


93.9 


104.7 


164.5 


93.3 


94.2 


108.7 


170.8 


115.7 


1904. 






105.0 


142.6 


98.0 


109.4 


132.9 


72.6 


96.9 


104.4 


184.1 


115.7 


1905, 






117.1 


134.2 


96.0 


120.8 


137.2 


68.7 


106.7 


91.2 


145.3 


125.0 


1906, 






118.5 


106.8 


93.4 


128.0 


161.6 


78.1 


91.7 


96.3 


167.7 


128.2 


1907, 






133.1 


117.8 


105.9 


123.0 


163.5 


88.0 


94.4 


104.2 


180.6 


125.0 


1908, 






129.8 


126.8 


111.8 


121.4 


154.5 


102.8 


100.3 


109.8 


159.1 


118.8 



Index Numbers of British Wholesale Prices, 1899-1908. 





-a 

3 


03 

s 




03 

o 


in 




'3 

ft 


3 
3 






















.2 "in 


3 


M 


fl'a 


.3 3 


qa 







Year. 


ft 3 
"ft 

»- o 


I 


.9 

-3 


8-6 

I 


.2* 

PQ . 


s 


"3 . 


.2 

"3) 

3 

ft 




©.s 




g 


WS 


w 3 


3 


.a 






■^ 3 
OS 


3^ 


1 


03 

•5 M 


W)0 


"o 




_ 3 




PQ 


ft 


£ 


Ph 


QQ 


Ph 


o 


£ 


1899, 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


1900, 






99.0 


103.8 


105.0 


102.3 


107.1 


108.0 


152.3 


95.5 


1901, 






101.9 


100.0 


105.0 


91.9 


88.1 


104.0 


126.1 


83.3 


1902, 






99.0 


98.1 


117.5 


86.0 


69.0 


100.0 


134.1 


75.8 


1903, 






97.1 


101.9 


105.0 


101.2 


81.0 


100.0 


150.0 


87.9 


1904, 






99.0 


107.5 


105.0 


91.9 


97.6 


98.0 


181.8 


122.7 


1905. 






103.9 


107.5 


100.0 


94.2 


104.8 


90.0 


151.1 


150.0 


1906, 






106.8 


100.0 


100.0 


101.2 


81.0 


98.0 


175.0 


162.1 


1907, 






104.9 


109.4 


105.0 


115.1 


85.7 


108.0 


161.4 


148.5 


1908, 






110.7 


118.9 


112.5 


105.8 


92.9 


108.0 


156.8 


103.0 



While it does not lie within the province of this investigation 
to inquire into the movement of prices in earlier periods prior 
to the recent advance, a presentation of the comparative statis- 
tics of prices in this country and in England, from 1840 to 
1909, will be interesting, as showing the relation of the rise 
of recent years to the course of prices in previous decades. For 
this purpose the Aldrich and the Bureau of Labor index num- 
bers have been combined for the United States, and the Sauer- 



26 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



beck numbers have been used for England. The following- 
table and the accompanying charts show the movement of 
American and English prices of all articles and of food stuffs : — 











Relative Prices in 


Gold. 








YEAR. 


Aldrich 
Committee. 1 


Sauerbeck. 


YEAR. 


Aldrich 
Committee. 1 


Sauerbeck. 


Food. 


All 
Articles. 


Food. 


All 
Articles. 


Food. 


All 

Articles. 


Food. 


All 
Articles. 


1840, 
1841, 
1842, 
1843, 
1844, 
1845, 
1846, 
1847, 
1848, 
1849, 
1850, 
1851, 
1852, 
1853, 
1854, 
1855, 
1856, 
1857, 
1858, 
1859, 
I860, 
1861, 
1862, 
1863, 
1864, 




96.6 

94.4 

82.9 

79.3 

81.6 

87.3 

94.6 

94.7 

83.5 

79.0 

85.5 

90.6 

88.7 

101.2 

105.9 

111.8 

110.4 

117.5 

94.6 

98.8 

100.0 

95.8 

107.7 

91.7 

106.7 


116.8 
115.8 
107.8 
101.5 
101.9 
102.8 
106.4 
106.5 
101.4 
98.7 
102.3 
105.9 
102.7 
109.1 
112.9 
113.1 
113.2 
112.5 
101.8 
100.2 
100.0 
100.6 
114.9 
102.4 
122.5 


95 
105 
84 
76 
75 
74 
75 
91 
101 
101 
99 
102 
88 
89 
98 
97 
94 
89 
88 


103 

100 

91 

83 

84 

87 

89 

95 

78 

74 

77 

75 

78 

95 

102 

101 

101 

105 

91 

94 

99 

98 

101 

103 

105 


1865 
1866 
1867 
1868 
1869 
1870 
1871 
1872 
1873 
1874 
1875 
1876 
1877 
1878 
1879 
1880 
1881 
1882 
1883 
1884 
1885 
1886 
1887 
1888 
1889 






100.1 
124.1 
121.8 
118.6 
120.1 
126.8 
152.9 
122.2 
115.2 
118.0 
116.0 
109.1 
113.3 
105.5 
97.6 
107.6 
110.9 
118.8 
118.8 
108.9 
98.7 
99.5 
104.2 
109.4 
111.9 


100.3 
136.3 
127.9 
115.9 
113.2 
117.3 
122.9 
127.2 
122.0 
119.4 
113.4 
104.8 
104.4 
99.9 
96.6 
106.9 
105.7 
108.5 
106.0 
99.4 
93.0 
91.9 
92.6 
94.2 
94.2 


91 
95 

101 
100 
94 
93 
98 
102 
107 
104 
100 
99 
101 
96 
90 
94 
91 
89 
89 
79 
74 
72 
70 
72 
75 


101 
102 
100 
99 
98 
98 
100 
109 
111 
102 
96 
95 
94 
87 
83 
88 
85 
84 
82 
76 
72 
69 
68 
70 
72 



Table No. 29, Aldrich Committee Report, Wholesale Prices and Wages. 











Bureau of 
Labor. 


Sauerbeck. 








Bureau of 
Labor. 


Sauerbeck. 




Food. 


All 
Articles. 


Food. 


All 
Articles. 




Food. 


All 
Articles. 


Food. 


All 
Articles. 


1890 
1891 
1892 
1893 
1894 
1895 
1896 
1897 
1898 
1899 








112.4 
115.7 
103.6 
110.2 
99.8 
94.6 
83.8 
87.7 
94.4 
98.3 


112.9 
111.7 
106.1 
105.6 
96.1 
93.6 
90.4 
89.7 
93.4 
101.7 


73 

77 
73 
72 
66 
64 
62 
65 
68 
65 


72 
72 
68 
68 
63 
62 
61 
62 
64 
68 


1900, 
1901, 
1902, 
1903, 
1904, 
1905, 
1906, 
1907, 
1908, 
1909, 






104.2 
105.9 
111.3 
107.1 
107.2 
108.7 
112.6 
117.8 
120.6 


110.5 
108.5 
112.9 
113.6 
113.0 
115.9 
122.5 
129.5 
122.8 


69 
67 
67 
66 
68 
69 
69 
72 
72 
73 


75 

70 
69 
69 
70 
72 
77 
80 
73 
74 



The salient features of the movement of prices as shown in 
the chart opposite this page are as follows : — 

1. A drop in prices, 1840-43, due to industrial depression. 

2. A rise to 1847, which may be connected with bad harvests 
and the Irish potato famine in the case of English prices, and 
a high tariff in the United States. 

3. A fall to 1849, more pronounced in England than in the 



27 

md 
the 

p!y 

on. 
irly 
tern 

of 

far, 
the 

iish 

, in 
^er. 
re- 
less 
unl- 
oad 

Lght 

res- 

3 Of 

old, 
, on 



>ard 
sale 
dex 
the 
con- 



ENGLISH AND AMERICAN RELATIVE WHOLESALE PRICES IN GOLD OF ALL COMMODITIES FOR A SERIES OF ' 



M j 



age Price, 1860, being 100. Relati 
■>ort, March, 1909, Average Price, 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 27 

United States, traceable to repeal of the corn laws, crisis and 
depression in England, and to reduction of the tariff in the 
United States. 

4. An advance to 1857, due to increase of the gold supply 
following the California discoveries and general prosperity. 

5. A drop in 1857 and 1858, caused by crisis and depression. 

6. Great fluctuations of American prices during the early 
60's on account of war and disturbance of the currency system 
by greenback issues. 

7. A sharp rise of American prices to the high point of 
1866, due to the causes already mentioned. 

8. A fall of American prices to 1869, following the war, 
English prices remaining comparatively stable during the 
decade 1860-70. 

9. An advance of American prices, 1869-72, and of English 
prices, 1870-73, due to business activity and speculation. 

10. A fall of both American and English prices to 1879, in 
consequence of the panic of 1873 and demonetization of silver. 

11. A rise of American prices, 1880-82, following the re- 
sumption of specie payments and the improvement of business 
conditions; English prices, after a slight rise in 1880, continu- 
ing to fall to 1887, on account of prolonged depression. 

12. A drop in American prices to 1886, due to railroad 
collapse, followed by slight recovery. 

13. A gradual decline of American prices to 1897, brought 
about by appreciation of gold, currency agitation and depres- 
sion; English prices also moving downward slowly to 1896, 
after a slight rise to 1891, produced by trade activity. 

14. A rapid rise of American prices and slower advance of 
English prices to 1907, caused chiefly by depreciation of gold, 
with temporary decline in 1900, caused by Boer war. 

15. Fall of both American and English prices, 1907-08, on 
account of panic and depression. 

Another record of English prices is furnished by the Board 
of Trade index numbers published in the report on wholesale 
and retail prices in the United Kingdom, 1903. The index 
numbers in this table represent 45 selected articles, and the 
percentages have been weighted according to the annual con- 
sumption of the different commodities. The table follows: — 



28 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Board of Trade Index Numbers, 1871-1902} 











< 

s . 


-0 

a 

1 
O 

1 


! 

S 

go 

,2 • 

'-5 oo 

M 
i 1 


III 


— Food 


and Drink. 


DO 


YEAR. 


a 

u 
o 
O 

1 


P=t„S 

aj to 

Us 

pq 


ef o 

•n 

* -> 

2 n 

m g S 
i S « 

o 


i-5 

i— i 

0. 

o 
u 

o 

I 


3 
O 
93 
O 

1 

5 
i 

> 


1871 




100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


1872 








110.6 


154.1 


114.0 


104.0 


102.0 


102.0 


102.7 


105.1 


1873 








118.8 


194.8 


110.2 


109.7 


109.3 


98.1 


108.2 


109.5 


1874 








113.6 


158.8 


102.6 


110.8 


110.1 


94.9 


108.6 


108.4 


1875 








107.8 


126.3 


100.2 


99.9 


116.6 


93.9 


107.3 


99.3 


1876 








104.2 


107.2 


93.6 


98.7 


117.2 


90.7 


106.8 


97.9 


1877 








105.3 


99.9 


91.7 


107.9 


114.9 


96.9 


110.3 


97.3 


1878 








99.3 


92.9 


88.5 


98.9 


112.2 


88.4 


104.2 


88.3 


1879 








94.9 


86.8 


84.1 


97.4 


106.7 


85.2 


100.5 


81.5 


1880 








97.4 


94.9 


88.6 


98.0 


106.6 


86.2 


100.8 


89.2 


1881 








95.7 


91.1 


87.0 


94.9 


106.7 


84.4 


99.4 


88.5 


1882 








97.3 


91.8 


84.1 


95.8 


112.0 


83.6 


102.3 


89.1 


1883 








96.5 


90.3 


82.0 


93.9 


113.7 


80.9 


102.1 


87.5 


1884 








88.3 


86.4 


79.8 


81.1 


104.7 


70.7 


91.4 


82.2 


1885 








83.0 


82.1 


75.7 


76.7 


96.3 


66.7 


85.1 


80.2 


1886 








78.5 


78.8 


69.0 


71.8 


92.7 


63.7 


81.1 


73.8 


1887 








76.7 


80.1 


70.7 


71.2 


88.2 


61.4 


78.3 


69.3 


1888 








79.3 


83.0 


70.0 


71.7 


94.0 


65.0 


81.8 


71.0 


1889 








80.8 


94.1 


72.4 


70.6 


92.8 


68.0 


81.1 


74.3 


1890 








82.8 


113.6 


72.9 


72.0 


91.7 


63.8 


80.6 


72.9 


1891 








84.1 


106.6 


70.1 


83.2 


91.1 


64.8 


84.9 


70.1 


1892 








80.1 


98.8 


66.1 


73.4 


91.8 


63.9 


81.3 


68.1 


1893 








78.7 


89.4 


66.6 


68.3 


95.2 


65.0 


81.1 


66.2 


1894 








75.1 


91.7 


60.8 


63.1 


92.2 


59.5 


76.9 


62.7 


1895 








72.2 


85.8 


57.7 


62.2 


88.2 


56.2 


74.2 


62.6 


1896 








69.8 


83.3 


64.0 


57.6 


81.9 


57.0 


69.4 


63.6 


1897 








71.3 


84.4 


59.7 


62.7 


84.6 


54.9 


72.4 


63.9 


1898 








73.6 


92.7 


54.8 


73.1 


81.8 


54.2 


75.1 


66.5 


1899 








74.5 


107.5 


57.2 


63.7 


85.8 


52.5 


73.2 


67.9 


1900 








83.2 


151.9 


70.0 


62.4 


90.3 


52.4 


74.9 


74.3 


1901 








79.2 


124.7 


65.7 


64.0 


89.8 


50.1 


75.3 


71.7 


1902 








78.8 


114.9 


65.0 


63.7 


94.4 


46.1 


76.7 


69.2 



1 Report on wholesale and retail prices in the United Kingdom in 1902, with comparative 
statistical tables for a series of years. Great Britain, Board of Trade, August 6, 1903, p. xxxiv. 



29 

how 



82.8 
84.1 
94.0 
100.2 
102.7 
101.9 
107.5 
93.8 
96.2 
100. 
97.6 
101.4 
103.7 
106.9 
101.4 
104.0 
102.9 
.00.8 
.02.0 
.01.6 
.05.0 
.12.1 
.14.3 
.12.6 
07.3 
.06.1 
.05.6 
99.7 
96.8 
00.8 
00.1 
01.0 
01.0 
94.4 
89.9 
86.0 
84.3 
84.3 
87.7 
89.4 
90.3 



15h 



W mo 
1351% 




:■•:• -i-ai^i j^lilj -~ ■■:•■ ^±,:l-.:h:::h::r::^M 







:Tl.._._j .. 



English Prices from Sauerbeck. No Index Number prior to 1846 From 
Statistical Journal, 1886, 1910. American Prices from Report of Alork 
Committee, Vol. I, Table 29, and Report of Bureau of Labor, March, 191 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



29 



The following tables, compiled from the Aldrich report, show 
the earlier course of German and of French prices : — 



Prices in Hamburg, 1851-91 (1860 = 100). 





4? 




& 

o 

73 


DO 

O 




J2 


m 


m 












O 


T3 


m 


3 






Year. 


o 


03™ 


Ph 


U 

Ph 


o3 


rt 

£ 


O 
0> 


< . 








o 


fl 






a 










03^3 

as 


1 


1 

3. 


0) 


JD 


03 


A 2 
'.3 x 


"3 




£3 


*3Ph 


3 


£ 


.3 


t 


m 


"CW 


o 




Ph 


< 


W 


H 


i 


H 


a 


m 


H 


1851, . 


74.0 


82.5 


74.8 


83.1 


88.1 


96.0 


89.0 


92.8 


82.8 


1852 








82.8 


79.8 


79.2 


83.1 


88.1 


96.6 


81.4 


90.9 


84.1 


1853 








95.8 


85.9 


103.7 


95.8 


100.5 


93.3 


90.0 


95.3 


94.0 


1854 








112.5 


90.6 


93.8 


98.2 


106.7 


102.7 


102.2 


94.3 


100.2 


1855 








118.7 


92.4 


118.0 


100.6 


109.6 


95.3 


93.8 


93.1 


102.7 


1856 








111.4 


95.4 


129.6 


103.1 


107.4 


92.0 


86.0 


93.3 


101.9 


1857 








103.3 


104.8 


140.7 


116.7 


114.7 


103.2 


92.5 


95.9 


107.5 


1858 








89.7 


95.0 


100.3 


93.7 


100.3 


95.3 


85.3 


95.6 


93.8 


1859 








89.3 


97.7 


94.2 


96.2 


99.9 


96.3 


98.9 


100.2 


96.2 


1860 








100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


1861 








98.3 


93.3 


101.4 


97.4 


94.2 


101.9 


102.4 


100.2 


97.6 


1862 








94.8 


95.1 


94.7 


97.5 


93.8 


114.3 


134.4 


108.2 


101.4 


1863 








89.8 


92.8 


95.5 


97.2 


94.7 


139.6 


138.1 


126.4 


103.7 


1864 








88.1 


96.6 


90.9 


104.5 


96.2 


141.9 


139.2 


138.8 


106.9 


1865 








94.6 


101.1 


94.7 


96.5 


91.0 


108.3 


103.6 


130.5 


101.4 


1866 








102.9 


101.4 


104.9 


98.0 


88.8 


124.1 


95.3 


132.9 


104.0 


1867 








109.4 


99.2 


105.1 


95.1 


85.8 


119.8 


32.6 


126.8 


102.9 


1868 








105.9 


99.8 


100.3 


97.1 


84.4 


117.0 


86.7 


120.8 


100.8 


1869 








99.0 


107.1 


96.0 


101.5 


88.7 


120.0 


84.0 


121.4 


102.0 


1870 








98.1 


104.2 


98.5 


100.2 


91.7 


113.0 


95.2 


116.2 


101.6 


1871 








108.2 


107.8 


102.2 


100.0 


93.7 


109.6 


100.6 


116.1 


105.0 


1872 








107.8 


116.5 


104.2 


108.3 


111.9 


112.9 


110.0 


123.2 


112.1 


1873 








109.3 


117.2 


109.8 


111.7 


129.4 


110.0 


102.0 


121.7 


114.3 


1874 








112.9 


118.0 


120.5 


113.7 


107.4 


103.7 


96.0 


119.4 


112.6 


1875 








103.3 


118.6 


109.1 


109.8 


98.9 


102.5 


84.5 


118.3 


107.3 


1876 








105.5 


116.5 


106.9 


107.9 


97.8 


97.1 


87.1 


1.12.9 


106.1 


1877 








108.7 


114.0 


116.8 


108.3 


91.0 


99.6 


85.4 


108.0 


105.6 


1878 








99.1 


105.8 


111.6 


104.4 


86.6 


94.1 


83.2 


105.1 


99.7 


1879 








99.4 


102.9 


115.6 


102.5 


77.6 


90.8 


77.2 


100.3 


96.8 


1880 








103.3 


110.1 


128.5 


102.2 


81.3 


88.9 


81.5 


102.4 


100.8 


1881 








102.8 


113.1 


121.8 


101.9 


78.1 


91.3 


81.2 


97.6 


100.1 


1882 








103.5 


116.0 


115.7 


101.8 


80.1 


87.5 


84.8 


99.2 


101.0 


1883 








107.2 


116.9 


118.3 


99.9 


76.3 


88.2 


81.6 


99.2 


101.0 


1884 








92.6 


112.3 


99.8 


98.0 


72.4 


89.2 


72.6 


97.9 


94.4 


1885 








82.8 


105.0 


102.8 


96.8 


68.3 


88.2 


69.6 


95.2 


89.9 


1886 








75.5 


99.8 


101.7 


96.0 


64.9 


82.5 


67.4 


91.9 


86.0 


1887 








72.0 


97.1 


101.2 


96.9 


66.7 


74.9 


66.2 


90.9 


84.3 


1888 








73.4 


96.4 


99.8 


96.8 


69.5 


75.6 


63.6 


89.9 


84.3 


1889 








76.3 


97.9 


106.0 


98.8 


72.3 


81.9 


74.0 


91.5 


87.7 


1890 








80.4 


97.1 


115.2 


99.2 


76.9 


75.3 


78.5 


89.9 


89.4 


1891 








89.5 


98.4 


116.3 


94.4 


78.0 


73.9 


72.8 


90.1 


90.3 



30 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



French Prices, 1861-91. 



ffl a 

O a> 



SO 



^T3 

&*• 

® 2 2 

> a £ 











T3 • 


3 a 






i'a' 

s 


o> 






® "2 






a; CO 


M 

O 




5* 


,S.sa 


U 

a 


O 


^0 




a 



O 





J 


O 


£ 



1861 
1862 
1863 
1864 
1865 
1866 
1867 
1868 
1869 
1870 
1871 
1872 
1873 
1874 
1875 
1876 
1877 
1878 
1879 
1880 
1881 
1882 
1883 
1884 
1885 
1886 
1887 
1888 
1889 
1890 
1891 



100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


144.3 


94.2 


100.0 


95.0 


106.6 


125.0 


104.6 


114.5 


100.0 


100.0 


114.3 


94.2 


100.0 


97.6 


98.1 


140.0 


105.6 


122.7 


95.2 


75.0 


116.4 


94.2 


100.0 


90.9 


116.0 


131.7 


106.7 


119.0 


95.2 


75.0 


114.3 


72.5 


100.0 


93.7 


134.2 


116.7 


100.1 


111.3 


95.2 


75.0 


125.0 


75.4 


100.0 


102.9 


131.0 


103.3 


96.6 


149.4 


95.2 


75.0 


107.1 


73.9 


100.0 


105.2 


147.0 


86.7 


104.4 


132.8 


95.2 


75.0 


103.6 


75.4 


100.0 


107.2 


157.7 


76.7 


90.2 


119.9 


23.8 


50.0 


103.6 


84.1 


100.0 


107.9 


138.5 


70.0 


85.5 


115.0 


23.8 


50.0 


107.1 


84.1 


100.0 


107.9 


126.6 


76.7 


86.4 


115.0 


23.8 


50.0 


114.3 


98.6 


94.4 


111.0 


126.2 


100.0 


94.4 


130.0 


42.8 


50.0 


134.3 


95.7 


144.4 


114.0 


129.0 


106.7 


100.9 


136.4 


47.6 


50.0 


158.6 


89.9 


133.3 


122.7 


111.3 


100.0 


88.8 


143.6 


33.1 


37.5 


162.9 


79.7 


133.3 


108.6 


83.4 


96.7 


81.2 


148.5 


35.2 


30.0 


156.4 


76.8 


55.6 


103.0 


75.6 


93.3 


84.7 


153.1 


38.1 


25.0 


144.3 


81.2 


66.7 


105.5 


108.9 


83.3 


82.4 


140.1 


33.3 


20.0 


147.9 


97.1 


77.8 


106.3 


90.3 


86.7 


90.4 


110.5 


28.6 


17.5 


133.6 


81.2 


100.0 


106.8 


84.0 


86.7 


88.8 


127.0 


25.7 


15.0 


127.1 


79.7 


72.2 


103.8 


88.5 


100.0 


82.8 


131.7 


23.8 


15.0 


120.7 


92.8 


64.4 


101.7 


81.7 


116.7 


84.7 


134.4 


25.7 


15.0 


107.9 


92.8 


83.3 


99.0 


83.0 


100.0 


81.9 


137.4 


23.8 


17.5 


95.7 


92.8 


72.2 


105.3 


81.2 


78.3 


70.4 


144.2 


24.8 


17.5 


99.3 


87.0 


105.6 


106.2 


77.1 


76.7 


70.3 


155.6 


22.9 


15.0 


87.1 


68.1 


155.6 


99.7 


71.6 


73.3 


72.8 


150.9 


19.0 


15.0 


83.6 


68.1 


155.6 


96.9 


67.5 


60.0 


74.3 


142.0 


17.1 


15.0 


107.9 


46.4 


155.6 


94.7 


69.6 


71.7 


67.5 


130.8 


9.5 


15.0 


147.9 


47.8 


155.6 


87.8 


66.9 


66.7 


66.4 


117.6 


9.5 


15.0 


138.6 


53.6 


138.9 


85.0 


03.2 


68.3 


66.6 


117.9 


66.7 


15.0 


158.6 


58.0 


135.6 


96.4 


69.4 


75.0 


65.1 


125.5 


57.1 


15.0 


164.3 


46.4 


83.3 


105.5 


72.1 


75.0 


67.0 


109.1 


114.3 


15.0 


151.8 


52.2 


83.3 


102.7 


60.0 


69.3 


63.5 


138.8 


95.2 


15.0 



100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
100.0 
62.5 
62.5 
62.5 
62.5 
62.5 
70.0 
75.0 
70.0 
72.5 
70.0 
65.0 
50.0 
45.0 
48.8 
43.8 
41.3 
36.3 
31.3 
32.5 
35.0 
35.0 
37.5 
37.5 
50.0 
42.5 



100.0 
83.3 
83.3 
83.3 
83.3 
83.3 
104.2 
104.2 
104.2 
100.0 
100.0 
133.3 
158.3 
133.3 
141.7 
125.0 
108.3 
79.2 
66.7 
83.3 
66.7 
70.8 
58.3 
54.2 
58.3 
66.7 
66.7 
83.3 
141.7 
175.0 
175.0 



100.0 

172.7 

218.2 

218.2 

150.0 

158.2 

111.4 

100.9 

120.5 

104.5 

84.1 

105.9 

96.8 

82.3 

69.1 

65.9 

66.4 

66.4 

69.5 

74.5 

67.3 

68.2 

62.7 

66.4 

62.3 

54.5 

60.0 

59.1 

65.9 

66.4 

52.7 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



31 



The course of American, English, German and French prices 
is exhibited in parallel columns in another table of the Aldrich 
report, as follows : — 

General Summary. 





United 


United 










States 


States 


England, 


Hamburg, 


France, 


Yeab. 


Currency, 


Gold, 


21 


21 


16 




22 


22 


Articles. 


Articles. 


Articles. 




Articles. 


Articles. 








1860 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 




1861 














98.2 


98.2 


102.0 


- 


100.0 


1862 














124.9 


121.9 


109.0 


112.7 


117.7 


1863 














197.0 


135.8 


135.9 


130.1 


126.9 


1864 














268.8 


172.9 


144.8 


137.8 


128.6 


1865 














275.6 


127.5 


135.5 


111.9 


112.2 


1866 














194.0 


138.5 


133.0 


118.0 


115.1 


1867 














154.6 


114.9 


115.3 


111.1 


100.4 


1868 














151.5 


109.4 


99.3 


105.5 


94.5 


1869 














153.6 


113.3 


105.0 


109.7 


97.0 


1870 














140.3 


115.7 


105.5 


106.3 


93.6 


1871 














131.4 


118.7 


100.8 


107.7 


94.2 


1872 














138.0 


126.5 


108.8 


116.9 


104.6 


1873 














136.5 


121.1 


114.6 


114.9 


102.5 


1874 














125.3 


112.5 


110.2 


105.6 


94.0 


1875 














113.8 


101.2 


103.9 


102.0 


87.4 


1876 














105.8 


102.7 


102.4 


98.2 


84.7 


1877 














105.5 


99.3 


101.5 


98.4 


82.0 


1878 














94.5 


93.2 


94.1 


92.5 


78.4 


1879 














86.7 


86.7 


80.7 


111.9 


76.4 


1880 














100.5 


100.5 


92.2 


91.1 


79.2 


1881 














95.4 


95.4 


86.1 


88.5 


76.0 


1882 














96.2 


96.2 


88.4 


88.0 


73.4 


1883 














89.1 


89.1 


84.6 


86.5 


73.5 


1884 














88.5 


88.5 


82.5 


82.6 


72.4 


1885 














83.2 


83.2 


77.3 


77.5 


69.7 


1886 














80.4 


80.4 


73.3 


74.8 


69.3 


1887 














81.3 


81.3 


75.3 


75.1 


70.7 


1888 














81.0 


81.0 


80.0 


76.5 


73.5 


1889 














85.1 


85.1 


79.6 


81.2 


80.5 


1890 














84.6 


84.6 


82.3 


80.7 


83.2 


1891 














83.4 


83.4 


81.0 


80.4 


79.2 



The weekly reports of the Boston Chamber of Commerce fur- 
nish a valuable record of wholesale prices in that city. The 
monthly quotations of the prices of leading staples from 1890 
to 1910, compiled from these reports, — supplemented in some 
cases by data from other sources, — are given in the tables 
which follow : — 



32 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



oq 



fe 



•(jaxjeng jad 


03 


o 


o 


US 


lO -* 


US CO 


a> 




o 


co 


CO 


'Aionaj^ 'jaufea^g) ujoq 


o 


«* 


-* 


>* 


-* -^ 


Tfl CD 


us 


eo 




CD 


US 


•(punog aad 


48 eo 


CO 




CO 




^ 


l> 








eo 


'pajnoog apejQ % >y x 


cs_; 


_^ 




,_; 


i-l CO 


CO CO 






CO 




,_; 


aoaajg umtpaj\[ otqo) po^ 


$<" 








CO CO 


CO CO 


US 


CD 


CD 


CD 


CO 


•(pnnog jad 'Snijp 


03 „ 
-|J CO 


00 


e» 

CO 


CO 
CO 


CO CO 
CO CO 


t^ o 

~4 OS 


o 


lO 






OS 


-PJM spuBidfi) u o % i o o 


62 


3 


3 


3 


CO CO 


CO ^H 


o 


d 


OS 


C5 






o 


o 


o 


o 


o © 


o a> 


kO 


o 


o 


o 


eo 


•(uox J8d 'aAcng) iwq 


<* 


•>*l 


■* 


M< 






rt . 


CO 


"^ 


**! 






e© 


-* 


■* 


"* 


eo co 


•<# -& 


^ 


TH 


Tt< 


^ 


ss 


•(putiog 


48 

fiCO 




to 
















CO 


jad 'Suojoq "Qsomioji) T3aj, 




<M 


CO 


CO 


CO <M 


CO CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 




m 




\C0 


» 


^3\ ^! 


^ ^ 


^ 


^ 


^ 


^ 


00 


•(punog jad 'org) sohoq 


(H us 

O 


us 

CO 


o 


CO 


CO CO 


CO CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 
CO 


•(punog 


fls 


co 
eo 


eo 




•>* CO 


CO rn 


o 


m 

C2 


co 


<* 


o 


jad 'paq/epuBJQ) jraSng 


3- 


CO 


SO 


CO 


CO CO 


CO CO 


eo 


CD 


eo 


CD 


CO' 


•(punog 




© 


o 






^ 


^ 


^ 


o 


o 


00 

d 


jad 'apq^ ' 3o H) sni'Bjj 
























•(punog 


5^ 


£ 


X 


eo 


«o I 


1 1 




, 






CO 


jad 'passajQ) 2[ j o g 


0) 






















•(punog jad 'sja^. 


48^ 

COS 

03 
O 




voq 






£ o 




o 


o 


3 


© 


-jimft pui£[ 's^joqg) jaag 






















•(jajj-eg jad '^ua^g 


o 


o 


O 


US 


o o 


US o 
CO US 


o 


o 
o 


US 


o 
eo 


is 


Suudg pj-epuB^g) jnojg 


US 

«© 


US 


i« 


US 


us us 


US US 


CD 


CD 


lO 


us 


us 
























eo 












US US '£ US US 


us 


CO 


US 


o 


f- 


•Qausng jad) saoq/e^og 


d 

6© 


t- 


!>• 


OO 




CO CX> 










d 


•(PUTIOJ 


03 


CO 


CO 






■«*! CO 




*n 


CO 


CQ 


00 
CO* 


j a d 'pajjpi-qsajg) pivog 






















•(pqsng 


US 
CO 




US 

CO 


US 

oo 


US US 


O US 
O CO 


o 

CD 


us 

CD 


o 
eo 


o 

kO 


es> 

CM 


jad '^ag 3[joj^ Ava^j) sueag 


CO 
«© 


CO 


CO 


- 1 


(M CN 


CN CM 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


•(uazoQ 


33 




X 


^ 


CO ■«* 


•**< 00 


oa 


o 


lO 


t^ 


o 

00 


jad 's^sjig ujaqsa^i) s3Sg 


03<*l 
O 






















•(punog jad 


03 








O CO 


t^ o 


US 


<* 


CD 


t^ 


eo 


'XjaufBajQ tj+uoj^) Ja^ng 




co 


CI 


CO 


CO ^H 












o 






















O 
Q 






















§ 






















P 




















. 


H 


03 

d 

•-3 


- 


o 




1 1 


1 1 


03 

£ 
4S 

03 

QQ 


o 

s 

o 


JO 

a 

o 
!25 


s 
s 

03 

p 





1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



33 



























CO 


is 


S 


S 






s 
















?s 




O 






















CO 


t~ 


oo 


CO 


o 


CO 


t^ 


t>- 








t* 





























■2co 


CO 


(, 


co 


CD 


» 


CO 


CO 


„, 


■* 


•# 


CO 


CM 


,<$S 


_H 










^ 


f>. 


c© 


to 


to 


m 


00 
















"5 


U0 


lO 






u 


























So 


■<J< 


r~ 


CM 


CM 


o 




CM 


t^. 


o 


OS 


o 


o 


-CO 


' H 




CO 


o 


lO 


CO 








1—1 






rS» 


o> 




















t>- 


CO 


U 


























o 


o 


o 








o 


O 


— 


- 


o 


o 


CO 


•«*< 


■"»< 


■f 


r~ 


t>- 


o 


o 


-- 






•«*< 


•* 


1-1 


s 


■^ 


■** 


CO 


co 


CO 


CO 


CO 


■<*< 


"* 


"* 


"* 


s 


tn 
























CO 




CM 


N 


CM 


CO 


CO 


CO 


00 


CO 


CO 


CO 




§3 


aj M 


EC 




CO 


CM 


~] 


CM 


:m 


CM 


CM 






o 


























is 


-" 


-- 


- 


S 


-- 


~- 


\t!< 


- 


S 


s 


S 


CO 


Ecm 




























CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 
















o 


























ioo 


00 


a 


ia 


i« 


^ 


X 


CO 




s 


00 




o 


d** 






*"* 


!>• 


'T 1 


CO 


CO 






T ~ l 






^- 


«o 


t~ 


^ 


"* 


•^ 


■* 


-* 


"* 


"* 


"* 


-<*< 


*a 


00 \^ 






N* 


-- 


X 


■ c, 








\^ 


S 


"0 


a° 






O 


c 


o 


3 












o" 




























D 


























S3! 


s 


S 


S 




















"aS> 


•c 


•o 












1 


































lO 


O 


























GO 


-- 




g 








g 


S 


£ 


-~' 




CO 










CM 




CM 


M 


CM 


CM 


































o 


























© 


o 


w 


lO 


§ 


c 


O 


o 


U0 


c 


o 


>o 


t^ 


■«* 




•^ 






•**< 


■^< 


t>- 




•^ 


CO 


«o 


"5 


m 
















































e© 


























CO 


O 


o 


lO 


o 


»o 






00 


















CM 


«"" ' 


CM 




"5 


■■£ 




Tf 




00 


«» 
























g 


00 
























t» 


d^ 


cm 


CO 


•^ 


IQ 


CO 


"5 


— 


Ttl 


•**< 


■^ 


■* 


CO 




























O 


























m 


U5 


a 


© 


O 


o 


a 


US 


o 


cr 


o 


o 




CN 


^< 


T*< 


■"** 








~~ 


rri 




•»-' 


rt 


CO 


MB 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


II 


B 








S 


S 


\N 












CO 


g<M 






CM 
























CM 












CM 


CM 


N 


cq 


O 


























i 














S 










OS 


flOO 




lO 


CO 


OS 


o 


o 


—. 


CO 


IC 








&<*« 




CO 












CM 


CM 


CM 




CM 


o 


















































03 


6 

S3 

3 

a 

03 
►■3 


c3 

3 


oj 


< 


s 

s 


(0 

- 

3 




ao 

3 
bO 

3 

<3 


O 

E 
a 

03 
X 


0) 

s 

o 


U 

— 



> 
o 


b 
<V 

-- 

% 


p 


of 

M 

03 

> 



34 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May., 



T3 

CD 
P 

.a 



Gq 



•(jsqsng; jad 




^ 


LO 


co eo cxi 


CO CO 


CO 


^ 






OS 


'Mojfa;^ 'jam'Ba^g) uioq 


S"5 
O 






K3 k« CD 


CO 


«3 


lO 


«3 


"5 


•(punoj J8d 


-2co 


«o 


CO 


CO ■* •* 


eo co 


to 


O 


CO 




CO 


'pa.moog 'ep^o s^ >y x 




K5 


Tji 


CO CO CO 


.-i i-J 


^* 










aoaaj^j umipaj\[ oiqo) I°°M 


o" 5 


lO 


l-O 


IO US >Q 


m U3 


tG 


»o 


U3 


«S 


U0 


•(punoj jad 'Suiip 




CO 
0-3 


eo 

CO 


CO CO CO 

O ■<* CO 


00 rH 
CO 00 


50 


C7; 

o 


IQ 
OS 


CO 


CO 


-P!H spuBidfi) nonoo 




^ 


o 


r~ t~ co 


t^ t^ 


t- 


co 


CO 


OS 


t- 




>o 


"O 


US 


*a *n «o 


o o 


lO 










•(UOJ, J3d '8A0^g) p30Q 


, ~! 














r^ 


t~ 


CO 






CO 


CO 




■* •«* 


xH 






























e^ 


•(pnnoj 


B3 
"goo 


CO 


CO 


00 00 00 
CO CO CO 














aad 'Suopo "Bsotnioj) B9X 


5=^ 






CO CO 


CO 


OJ 




CO 


CO 




*S 


s 


^ 








XO, 






OS 


•(punoj iad 'org;) aajjoQ 


8^ 
o 


& 


8 


"5 CO CO 
CO CO CO 


eo co 

CO CO 


co 


CO 
CO 


eo 


CO 


§5 


•(punoj 




eq 


CO 


o ■># ■># 

lO -# ■"*! 


o o 




00 


co 




CO 


j a d 'pa^nu'BiQ) xeSng 




-* 


* 


^ "* ^ 


■* T»H 


-*' 


IC 


io 


>* 


m' 


•(punoj 


£Oi 


o 


as 

o 


O ^H T-l 


CO CO 


CO 


X 




S 


CO 


i8d 'apq^ 'Sojj) STn^jj 


co 

o 




















•(punoj 


flkO 


5) 


io 


co 1 1 


1 1 








I 


CO 


I 8 d 'p8SS8IQ) 3[JOJ 


o 




















•(ptmo<j J9d '$ia% 


B3^ 


o 


o 


O O OS 


^ 


£ 


S! 


X 


X 


00 

o 


-renfr putH 's^-ioqg) jaag 






















•(jaj-reg jad '^ua^j 


o 

CO 


lO 


Cd 


o in w 

00 00 OS 




K 


o 

CO 


o 


o 


CO 


Suudg pxBpui^g) .mojj 


as 


Ui 


o 


*# tJH ■* 


-* ■* 


■* 


"* 


-* 


■* 














\«> \« 


* 








t^ 






o 


CO 


o o o 






00 








•Qaqsng; iad) sao^^oj; 


u 








CO CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


co 


co 
o 


•(punoj 


tn 






■># eo m 


■* -<n 




CO 


CO 


eo 


CO 

eo 


j 8 d 'pani^-qsai^) jmo^ 


0)^ 




















•(pqsng 


o 
o 


o 

o 


o 
o 


o o io 


io o 


o 


o 
o 


kffl 


m 


CO 

o 


iad '138J 5[io_x. AV8N) streag 


«^ 


CO 


CO 


* „ ^ 


rH CM 


eo 


CXI 


CO 


CO 


eo 

€0 


'(U8Z0Q 


5 


00 




■* CO CO 


co r~ 


o 






i~^ 


CO 

o 


iad 's^sjij tua^sa^) sSSg; 












CN 


eo 


N 


CO 


eo 




oi 




















•(ptmoj J8d 




,_, 






CO •>* 












'AjamBajQ tf^io^) .ia^ng 


o>co 

O 


CO 


eo 


CO CO -H 


CO CO 


eo 


eo 


Ol 


CO 


CO 


W 

1 
o 




















§ 









































1 




















£> 




















W 


















0) 


First T 


>> 

u 


1-5 




43 
g 


^ a ^ 


m 

| I 


5 

a 

a 

CO 


o 
a 

O 


(4 

CD 

s 

1 


a 

CD 
S3 

<u 

Q 


o 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



35 



























t^ 


f?^ 








^\ 


3? 


j: 


a 










00 


3>o 


















CM 




t^. 




"3 


us 


us 


IQ 


US 


US 


US 


us 


IO 


IQ 




us 


O 


























$* 


CM 


CO 


CM 


CM 


eo 


us 


US 


_ 


,_ 


CO 


t^ 


CM 


6° 


CO 






S3 


-f 


eo 


CO 


_ 


rt 


o 


00 


CO 


US 


US 


US 


"* 


>* 


■^ 


"* 


«# 




■^ 






5 CO 
















t~ 


CO 








flCO 


O 


o 


O 


l^ 


■3! 




<# 


o 


cm 


CO 


GO 


CO 


3* 


a> 


OJ 


00 


t>- 


t^ 


00 


t~ 


00 


00 


00 


t^ 


00 


us 


IO 


[O 


us 


US 


o 


o 


us 


IO 


US 


IO 


IO 


Tf< 












■* 








-f 


«# 


■* 


Tfl 


M 
























&* 


03 
























CO 


flOO 
§CN, 

V 


00 






00 


DO 


00 


00 


eo 


eo 


eo 


eo 


t~- 


CM 






CM 




CM 


CM 


cm 






Ol 


CM 














"~* 


_w< 










m 


-' 


^ 


^ 


^ 
















!>. 


s<m 






IO 


ua 


















oi 


CM 


CM 


CM 


















o 














"" 












io 




r- 








t^ 














rt» 


CO 


"* 


t~ 


O 


o 


CM 


© 


O 


o 






00 


O'* 


■«* 


* 


T* 


US 


IQ 


US 


IO 


IO 


US 


"* 


«* 


«• 


m 


•* 




3* 


J." 


- 


^ 




» 


3? 






■* 


qco 


-*< 


lC 


-* 


T* 


-# 


■* 


co 






CM 




CO 


a)— 1 


























U 






























-. 




















^t< 




























a®- 




o 


Oi 


OJ 


OS 










1 


1 


Oi 


























O 


























03^ 


\N 










J' 


X 


£ 


^ 


£ 


^ 


US 


























o 


























o 


O 


o 


us 


© 




IQ 


o 


o 




O 


O 




us 


CO 


US 


■* 


•«* 


CO 


*-< 


•H 


»■* 


CO 


■H 




CO 


3 


■* 


* 


* 


■** 


»# 


Tjl 


-<n 


■># 


<• 


<tf 


•"# 




























00 




o 




CO 




o 


o 


O 








o 




00 


OS 


a> 




C: 


o 






CO 


IO 


t^ 




O0 


u 
























o 


£ 
























CM 


OS 
cp'-< 

o 


CI 


*ji 


IO 


IO 


LO 


CI 


*# 


CO 


-H 


CO 


o 


co 


























us 


us 


uo 


us 


us 


IO 


id 


o 


IO 


US 


IQ 


LO 


CM 


1-1 




CO 


CM 


'-' 


I" 1 


— 1 


^ 




o 


OJ 


oo 


1—1 


CM 




















,_, 


,_, 




w 
























€» 


CO 








_- 


\M 


c, 


NC-a 










-* 


"So 


US 




1^ 


CO 








t~ 


CM 








CO 


CM 














<M 


CM 


CM 


CM 


O 


























03 




















^ 




t- 


flOS 


O 


t» 


Oi 


00 




CM 




t^ 


o 






eo 


5<M 














CM 




CO 


Ol 


CJ 


CM 


O 












































































CO 


>> 


>> 














CO 

5 
S 

o. 

C9 
X 






X) 


S? 


i 

d 
as 


3 
| 


— 

o 


<3 


>> 

83 
S 


0> 

a 
a 
>-> 


>-5 


71 

< 


CD 

— 

O 

o 

O 


> 
o 


» 

o 
cu 


> 



36 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



T3 
CD 



.s 

o 

o 

I 

Oi 
- 00 

I s 

O 



•(jgqeng iad 


flCD 


s 

r^ 


CO 


CO 


© 


X 


1" 


s 






\N 




© 

CM 


'ji4.0n8A 'l9TH1391g) tIJOQ 




"* 


"* 


■* 


«# 


"* 


LO 


LO 


CO 


© 


© 


k« 


eo 
10 


•(punog jad 


.Sr- 








r^ 
















CM 


'pamoog 'epBJo ^ -^ 






^ 






















9099tg rampspf oxqo) I°°M 


co 


CO 


co 


co 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


ft 


CO 


eo 


•(punog i9d *Sui|p 


^2 


** 


CO 


CO 


CO 
CM 




^ 


<M 


-0 


■M 


LO 


12 


© 


"PIH sptrejdfi) nonoo 


£od 


r^ 


*■ 


l^ 


*■ 


t^ 


l> 


CO 





CO 


LO 


"5 


t^ 








© 






















'( no X I8( * '^AO^g) p30Q 


«* 


>* 






£^ 


t» 


t- 


© 


!>■ 


CO 


© 


© 


© 




G% 


«* 


"* 


CO 


CO 


eo 


eo 


r)H 


to 


CO 


<* 


■* 


CO 




DO 
























eo 


•(punog 




o 


CO 






















iad 'Suojoo 'Bsoxnioj) T39X 




CM 


cm 


CS 


C5 




CM 


SSI 


CN 


ffq 


N 


IM 


eq 




02 




J* 


^ 


^> 


« 


^ 


£ 


^? 








■* 


•(punog jed 'org) 99503 


fl© 

a>«M 
D 


to 

CM 


in 

cm 


CM 


CM 


LO 


LO 
C5 


LO 

CM 


3 


LO 
03 


LO 

O^ 


10 

CM 


us 

CM 


•(punog 






















































i 9 d 'pa^pan'BJQ) .reSng 


»co- 


CO 


* 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


TH 


"* 


"<T< 


CO 


eo 


•"*< 


•(punog 


»N£ 


\N 


£ 


- 








^ 


\* 


^ 


s 




iffl 


fl© 


o 


© 


© 








CO 


CO 










jsd 'apqM * So H) sutbh 




























•(punog 


03 


I* 


t» 


l>- 








, 


, 






CO 


OO 
CO 


J 9 d 'p9SS9IQ) 3{ I O g 


O 


























•(punog idd 'SJ9^ 


DO 


o 


oa 


» 


os 


© 


CO 


© 


C3 


so 


CO 


eo 


CM 


-xen£) puju 's^joqg) j9ag 


03 'l 


























•Q9xreg jad '^uacjBfj 


o 


© 


© 
© 


OS 


© 
© 


LO 


© 
© 


© 


© 
CO 


© 


© 


Id 




Suudg pj^puB^g) mojg 




-* 


Tfl 


eo 


■<*< 


CO 


BO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 




























© 




r~ 


co 


>a 




lO 


LO 


© 


LO 


Ui 





CO 


m 




•(J9u;6ng J9d) Bgo^og 


© 


CO 


CO 




oo 


-' 




r^ 




lO 


LO 


"9 


CO 

© 


•(punog 




© 


© 


© 


N 


N 


Ol 


05 


N 


01 


© 


© 


© 


J9d 'pgnH-qsgij) paog 




























•(laqsng 


o 


lO 


1-3 


»o 


© 


© 


© 

© 


LO 
© 


LO 

© 


LO 


© 

00 


© 


© 


jad '^gg ^joj^ Aia^j) 6ui39g 


&z> 






^ 


05' 


^ 


N 


CM 


CM 


^ 


~ 




e^ 


•(uazoQ 

J9d 'S^BJIJ UI9^S9^V) sSSg 


xh 


t^ 


© 




\pi 


CM 


CO^ 


■># 


r- 


© 


© 


lO 


© 






CM 


















CM 




•(punog J9d 


03 

o 


CD 


CO 


ro 


OO 


00 




N 


t* 


CO 


TH 


CO 


eo 


'if.19un39.13 t^io^[) ja^ng 


CM 


cm 


CM 




















o 

El, 


























o 

|H 

<! 

o 
so 

K 


























P 


























W 
























01 


H 




« 














U 




Li 


fe SP 


« 


>, 

u 
a 

3 

a 


3 




-a) 




t 

3 
^O 


-0 


CO 

O 
< 


J2 

a 

a 

02 


s 

S 



s 




J2 

a 

s 

u 

Q 


< 



1910. 



HOUSE— No. 1750. 



37 



t^ C4 CO 



CO CO CO CO 



O C5 Oi Oi 00 00 

OS CO CO CO CO CO 
OS CO CO CO CO CO 



r~ t~ t- oo 



CO CO CO CO 



CO CO CO ** 



cm <M CM 



<N (M (M <M CM CM 



ZJCi CO CO 



CO 

o 



o o o 



5 
O <o 






-« CM — <M <M CM 



CO CO CO 



co o o — c to o-t- lo 
co tj< ■*■»)<•<*• co eo'co co 



CM CM CM 



CM rt CM CM 



— « <M CM CM (M 



CM ON <M 



I I i 1 & 

3 £ a < a 



-2 -o 



38 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



o 
O 

I 

Oi 

I 

I • 

s s 

•» oo 
•8 
© 



•Qgqsng jad 



•(putlog jad 
'pamoog 'apBJQ y z '% 

9099^ UITnp9J\[ OITJQ) IOOjW 



•(pimog i9d 'Smjp 
-PIH epu^idfi) uon'oQ 



■(noj, J9d '9AO^g) JBOQ 



•(punog 

J9d 'SUOJOQ 'BSOUIIO^) ^9 J, 



•(punog J9d 'org) 99503 



•(punog 
j 9 d 'pg^BptTBiJ-)) JBSng 



•(punog 
j9d '9|or[^ '§oh) sra^H 



•(punog 

J 9 d 'p9SS9JQ) 3[ J O <J 



•(punog J9d l si9^ 
-.ren£) puijj 'e^ioqg) j99g 



•(pjjBg J9d '%uaiv£ 
Suiidg p-repui^g) Jnojj 



•(pqsng i9d) sgo^oj 



•(punog 
J 9 d 'pgiji^-qsajg) jMog 



•(pqsng 

I9d 'I39g 5[JOj^ Ai9N) SUB9g 



•(U9ZOQ 

J9d 's^sjig uia^sa^) eSSg; 



•(punog i9d 
'AJ9UH39IQ q^JOj^;) J9^ng 



O OS O CO t^ 
CO CO "^ CO CO 



•■* o cm in eo 

CO CO CO ec CO 



+5 OS 


r^ 


t~ 


o 


so 


C: 


O 


o 


o 


OD 


C5 


OS 


00 


co 


CO 


CO 
DC 


o 


C5 
CM 


OS 

cxi 


CM 


C5 


o 

CO 


CO 

CO 


CO 
CO 


CO 


-2 CO 


05 




"5 

OS 


£ 


SO 
CO 


so 

C3 


s 


o 


O 
O 


OS 


o 

CO 


OS 


^00 


£^ 


*- 


t-- 


00 


t^ 


t^. 


oo 


CO 


00 


»* 


** 


t- 


«3 


- 


to 


1^ 


o 

o 


us 

co 


o 


o 


o 
»o 


o 


CO 


CO 


o 



•>* CO CO CO •"* CO 



I SO CD5©S©SOOlOO«5COCOCO 

!CNCMeNCNeMCNCMeNeNcq<NC4 



CJIO Tfl Tj( Tf ■* ■* ■* 

2<M CM cm cm CM CM CM 



CM -* ■* CM 
t~ CO i-H t~ 



o o t- 



o o o o ^ 



3 3 5 - I 



OS O OS OS o o o 



CO OS 
CO CO 



COCOCOCOCOCOTpTjflO 



CMCMCMCMCMOOO 



O CM CM CM Tt< t^ 



>- Hi 



(h C3 - 

c3 3 -S . 

2 <» « ft v 

^ fi, § «< S £ 



•s & § i? 



43 




-Q 


A 


« 


d 

o 

a 


3 


d 

> 
o 


3 
eo 
o 
o 


> 

< 


CO 


O 


12! 








1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



39 



























o 


SI 




2? 


^\ 






S 






a: 




35! 


CO 


rICO 
£C3 






Ol 




















00 


w 


co 


co 


CO 


CO 


CO 












o 



























t- CO 
■*> CO 

CO CO 






•5CO t>- 



CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 
CM CM CM CM CM CM CM 



oo r^ 

CO ■>*< 



fl2 



o o o o o 



^ ^ ^ 



I I I I I 



02 




o 


o 




^ 


o 


© 




a 


I 


o 


© 


CO—* 

O 


























o 
oo 


W5 

CO 


o 

CO 


HO 
CM 


o 


o 

CO 


o 

CO 


o 

O0 


oo 


o 
><* 


o 


eo 


CO 
00 


3 


Tf< 


■* 


"* 


■>* 


■<* 


■<* 


tH 


to 


IQ 


>o 


uo 


3 


























t>- 


00 

co 


o 


00 


CO 


CO 


00 




CO 

00 


CO 


o 


o 




co 


© 
























8 


m 
























CO 


flO 


,— 1 


= 












© 


^H 


o 


o 


o 




























o 

CM 


o 

CM 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 
CO 


to 

00 


to 

CO 


UO 
CM 


Ol 


o 


3 
























0» 






t— O CM 



~H ^H CM 



U I C3 

1 g 

3 1; 



;2£ 3 



O, 03 



2 > 



<5 $ 6 55 Q 



40 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



T3 
CO 

d 

o 
o 



OS 



o 




o^ 




uo 




>- ( 


CO 




3J 




CO 






CO 




© 




cq 





•Qeqsng iad 


d 1 ^ 




CO 


X 


>* 


£ 





CM 




S. 




S 


CO 


'Mojjg^ 'laurea^g) uioq 


O 








^ 


" 






CO 


CO 


>* 




CO 


•(putlog jad 


-2-# 








Ci 


O 


CO 


CO 


CO 


4 


<# 


CO 


OS 


§ 


'pginoog 'apex*) % k y x 


§00 








b- 


l> 


r> 


t^; 


t^ 












9099JJ uinipaj^ oiqo)I°°AV 


O 






-* 


■<*( 


<* 


■* 


«* 


-* 




Tt^ 




■>*l 


•(ptmoj i9d 'Suiyp 


it- 
3<e 


eq 


OS 


10 


- 




*- 


OS 


CO 
CO 





no 

CO' 


CO 


OS 


■PIH spuB{d£j_) uo^oo 


3^ 











O 


CO 





u~ 


LO 


no 


no 


lO 










\a 







O 


















•(nOX J8d '9AO}g) psoQ 








00 




O 





O 





no 


no 


U5 


00 




sd 


CO 


-* 


CO 


<tf 


■rf 


"* 


^ 


>* 


CO' 


co 


CO 


a» 


•(punoj 


d£? 


re 


CO 


CO 


w 


U5 


10 




10 








eo 


J8d 'SU0]00 'BSOtaJOj) 139 J, 


O 












CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO' 


CO 


CM 




CO 
























OS 


•(punog jad 'ota) aajJQQ 





CM 


CO 


CO 
CI 


DO 
CM 


CO 

CI 


CO 
CM 


co 

CM 


CO 

eq 


CO 
cN 


CO 
CN 


CM 
CM 


CM 
CM 


•(punog 


d 05 


00 



en 


CO 


Iffl 


00 

c 


00 




co 
O 


HO 


00 


>* 


CO 


8 


j 9 d •pa^qntreiQ) xB§ng 




-* 


-<*i 


TH 


«5 


»o 


10 


"3 


10 


no' 


-* 


"* 


« 


•(ptmog 


flOS 


OS 


as 


3s 


OS 





00 


OS 


OS 





OS 






i3d '9[oq^ <So H) sxn^jj 


CD 

O 


























•(punog 


d"= 


no 


no 


1 


1 




1 






1 






10 

CM 


j a d 'passajQ) 3[ioj 




























•(punog jad 'si3^ 


3^ 





OS 





O 








O 


\C5 


X 


^ 





O 


-1BT15 pnijj 's^oqg) J99g 




























•Qaxreg i9d '^ug^Bg 







no 


t-- 


c 

"3 





*G 





O 


HO 





no 





t- 


Sutidg pxepue^g) mojg 


10 


"5 


uo 


"5 


CO 


<o 


10 


TH 


>* 


TJH 


^* 


>* 


lO 




























CM 




CM 


00 


00 


>fl 


O 


10 


Lffl 


U3 


O 


no 





CM 




•(pqsng i9d) sgo^og 


O 






















lO 


O 




m 
























O 


•(punog 


d<=> 


O 





O 


O 








O 


cr 








O 


O 


j 8 d 'psjitJl-qsa^) jAvog 


03'-* 
U 


























•Qgqsng 


lO 


i-0 
CM 


kfl 


IQ 


O 




CO 


CO 


O 

»o 






»o 




no 


O 


CO 


i9d 'i39g 3[io_s. -^N) snBsg 


&© 
























G% 


•(nazo(j 


c* CO 


O 




O 






CI 




US 


c~- 






O 


.iad 's^satg uia^sa.w) sSSg; 


5°^ 


C5 


















CI 


CM 




•(punog J9d 




£ 


CM 


CM 




r- 


t^ 


OS 


0^ 








O 


'i?J9a3'B9J:Q q^io^[) J9^^ng; 























<M 




CM 


1 





















































§ 


























fe 





















































t* 


























«j 


























Q 


























£ 





















































w 
























CJ 


H 




. 














t-l 




fc, 


U , M 


S 


OS 

3 
d 

1-5 


55 

3 



55 


ft 
< 


>> 


d 

3 


i-a 


CD 

3 
M 

3 


-2 

a 

CD 

ft 
<V 

HI 


£1 

s 






,0 

a 

CD 
> 
O 


a 
s 

CD 

Q 


4) 

> 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



41 



























i« 


<D\^ 




\* 


* 


S 


s? 




^\ 


* 


^ 






t-~ 


fl£ 










N 






CM 


CO 








•>* 










•^< 






T* 


■*»< 






o 


























ioo 


00 


00 


CM 


cm 


cm 


O 


■«* 


^ 


o 


oo 


rf 


CO 

CO 


o 


co 


CD 








o 


CM 


CM 




■"»> 


CO 


OS 


■* 


T* 


■«* 




T* 




L ~ 


lO 


US 








£c* 










eg 




"** 


■«t< 


t~ 


CM 


■^ 


00 


a~ 


W 


CO 


CM 


CM 


CM 




CM 


M 


CM 








$<* 


co 


co 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


t^ 


t*. 


t~ 


CO 


















in 


o 


o 


o 


CO 


t~ 




o 


o 


© 


00 


o 


o 




CO 


CO 


CO 




CO 
M 


CO 


* 


"* 


T* 


CO 


■* 


•*f 


•*< 


* 


"* 


■* 


2* 


s 
























ift 


ag 












irt 




m 




CO 


CO 




co 


CO 


CO 


CO 




w 




CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


O 


























s 


























C CM 






N 


CM 




CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


N 


CM 


CM 


cm 


CM 




CM 


Cm 


CM 


CM 


Cm 


CM 


CM 


SN 


CM 


o 




























CM 














CM 


cm 


CM 






t~ 


t"> 


t» 


SO 


OS 


O 


N 


CM 


C 


oo 


oo 


00 


OS 


S 


">*< 


TJ1 


"* 


** 


»ffl 


«3 


Hi 


»o 


■^ 


"* 


•* 


$ 


m^j 


S 


_r, 


JR 


£ 


^ 




N* 


s-f 








o 


(-00 


00 


00 


00 


OS 






































































O 


























* , 


























a ' 


























0) 


























O 


























to 


\cs 






^ 








N£ 






\N 


CM 






















































o 


























o 


o 


"5 


US 


>o 


o 




O 


o 




o 






CO 


•^ 


CO 


<M 












CO 


CM 




CM 


-tf. 






■f 


■^ 






"»< 










Tj< 


























w 


























t^ 


1« 


N 


Cm 


in 


o 


o 


o 


o 




1ft 


















x 




»o 


CO 


■*»* 


■»»< 


ira 


CO 


o 












,_ 






































<*& 








-i 


S(S 






\N 










^ 




























go 








o 




CM 




CM 




a 


OS 


o 


a)*" 1 


























u 


























o 


>o 


"0 


o 




.o 




IC 


1ft 










IQ 


uo 


»o 


lO 


o 


IQ 


»o 


« 


'- 


t^ 




CM 


CO 


























e© 


• 








SIN 
















OS 




























Is 
















t- 




o 






















CM 


CM 


CM 




o 


























3S 


^ 


Ng 
















se« 




CM 


gS 
















CM 










cm 














CM 


(M 


CM 


CM 


CM 


o 
















































eu 
























£ « 


a 

a 

4 


=5 

3 

l-l 

fa 


O 


a 
< 


a 


d 

3 
— - 




GO 

3 
if 
3 

«: 


E 
<x> 

Q. 

02 


CD 

1 

o 


43 

a 

> 

1 


s 

Q 


CO 
> 

< 



42 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



oo o 

>-< o 

o 

"03 
O 



•Qaqsng jad 


deq 


co 




£ 




s 


X 












OS 

eo 


'Mon9A '-taniraaig) ujoq 


8-* 

O 


tH 


-* 


-M 


<* 


TH 


uo 


<* 




10 






•* 


•(pntiog jad 


5o> 


OS 


OS 





■«*< 


CO 


CO 










00 


CO 

OS 


•pajnoog 'epBio % •% 











CO 


<* 














<r> 


CO 


aoaaj^ uinipaj\[ oiqo) I°°M 


WS 


10 


US 





10 


>o 


« 




>* 




r)H 


»o 


•(ptmoj J9d 'Suijp 


48 


CO 


00 





US 

CO 


CO 





CO 


t> 


b. 








eo 


-P!H spu^dxi) nonoo 


6- 




OS 


OS 











O 


O 


d 























1-1 


1-1 






























s 








•(«IOX J8d '8A0^g) i-boq 




CO 




CO 


eo 


CO 








CO 


CD 


■* 
























































s© 


(pnnoj 


eo 
























O 


jad 'Stropo 'bsotiiioj) ^j, 


^eo 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


co 


CO 


CO 


CO 




5 
























t- 


•(punoj jad 'org) aajgoQ 


Q 




eq 


N 


C5 


eq 


CO 
CC| 


CO 

eq 


CO 

eq 


CO 

eq 


C-3 




eq 
eq 


•(punoj 


4S«> 



























fl 1 ^ 











OS 


CO 


10 


CO 


CO 


CO 




eo 


CO 


j 8 d ' pasture j£>) j'eSng 




*o 


LO 


T* 


>* 


«o 


10 


10 


10 


10 


IO 


"5 


"5 


•(putlog 


is 


£ 


^ 


eq 


eq 


co 


CN1 


eq 


X 








t^ 


jad 'ajoq^ ,§ °H) sra^jj 




























•(putlog 


09 

T1« 


CO 


co 


lr~ 


t^ 


, 


1 






1 




, 


CO 
"5 


j 8 d 'passajQ) ?[ J o <j 


0> 
O 


























•(pnnoj jad 'sid% 


48^ 
O 






^ 


$ 




O 







£ 






O 


-j-enfr pniH *s;joqg) jaag 


























•QajjBg jad '^na^j 


10 


lO 


8 








OS 




OS 


O 





§ 


U3 

CO 


§ 


s 


CO 


Suudg p-repti^g) Jnoj^j 


«© 


«* 


"* 


"* 


CO 


CO 


■<* 


-* 


<* 


<* 


^CH 


■* 


g 

















IO 


t>. 


10 





00 


us 


»o 


•Qaqsng jad) sao^oj 


CO 
O 





CO 


CO 




US 


CO 












s 


•(punog 


"3° 













3! 


O 


3 






OS 


00 


CO 
OS* 


j a d 'panpt-qsaitf) T MC M 


03 *H 


























•(pqsng 


O 







CO 




00 




co 





O 











O 

to 




«5 


CO 


jad 'Bag ^jo _x_ Avajsj) sireag 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


C<l 


eq 


<TnI 


<M 


CO 


eq 


eq 


eq 


•(uazoQ 


?« 


C5 


"0 


5q 


eq 


eq 


C5 


CO 


"* 


l> 







»o 


jad 's^sji^ uja^sa^vi) sSSg; 





























•(punog jad 


CO 


CO 


CO 







OS 


O 





eq 


X 


CO 


"D 


eq' 


'Xaaui'BajQ i^jojsj;) Ja^ng 


seo 


eq 
























1 
















































































<! 


























§ 


























K 




























w 


















C 




s-T 


s a 1 


1 


i 

•-a 


u 

% 

u 

1 




"C 
ft 

< 


1 


6 
a 

i-s 




CO 

bD 


S 

ft 
O 

m 


0J 

JO 







J3 

a 



a 

as 


Q 


> 

< 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



43 



























^H 


s^ 






3? 


^ 


3? 


— , 


^\ 


J§* 


^ 


X 






fl§ 






o 








eq 




ua 


DO 






■* 


■* 


IQ 


US 


us 


IQ 


CO 


CO 










o 




























OS 


N 


CO 


_ 


_ 


OS 


OS 


t^ 


t^ 


OS 


a 


US 








,_, 


,_, 


,_, 


,_, 


<M 


<M 


,_, 


_| 








TJ< 


"* 


■* 


** 


"* 


■«*l 


-<t< 


"* 


^ 




-2 c© 


i>. 


t^ 




N 


O 




t~ 




o 


r~ 


CO 


CO 


c co 


^t 1 


US 


ro 


*~< 


us 


•>*< 


»-< 




CO 




<* 




62 


OS 


00 


00 


00 


00 


00 


00 


00 


00 


t» 


oo 


00 


























OS 


t-~ 


CN 




3 




cq 


CO 




US 


US 


US 


us 


us 


US 


us 


us 


•»*< 


■* 


"* 


•^ 


"* 


* 


"* 


T* 


* 


SB 


DO 

sco 
























o 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


CO 


CO 


BO 


CO 


CO 




CO 


CO 


CO 


M 


co 


00 


CO 


CO 




CO 




o 


























i 
























oo 


fl co 


co 


CO 


eo 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


E0 


CO 


us 


US 


us 




























O 


























is 




a 






















cm 


o 










o 


© 




CO 




5- 


US 


US 


us 


us 


IQ 


us 


US 


US 


US 


"* 


->* 


us 


$ 






£ 


X 


£ 






$ 








00 


fl- 1 












CM 


M 


CM 


DO 


05 


0-5 






























o 


























i^ 


35 


£ 




s? 
















00 


8* 




CO 


t- 


t^ 


t~ 


t^ 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 




























ro 


£ 


3? 


£ 








£ 




N* 




» 


o 


flO 


o 


o 


o 












CN 


CM 
































o 


























s 


o 


US 


e 






o 







o 






r~ 




*■* 


— 1 












—• 




OS 


Ol 




«0 


•* 


<* 


■<* 


•<* 


"* 


CO 


■* 


t* 


Tj< 


CO 


■* 


% 


























C<l 


o 


US 


US 




us 


us 




O 
























CO 


US 


t- 


EO 




OS 


t^ 


o 










,_, 




,_, 




































e© 


CD 








Ng 




NJJ 












Tt< 


QOO 

O 












03 








OS 


OS 


OS 


















































o 


o 


o 




o 


O 




o 


O 


o 


o 


o 




US 


US 


US 


US 


us 


















eq 


C5 


M 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 






<M 


eq 


CN 


<M 




























5 








3? 


N» 


3? 












CO 












CM 


CM 




CO 










CN 


















CM 


CN 




o 


























CO 










^ 




p 


£ 






_" 


t^ 


SIS 






<M 


00 








© 




(M 






CI 


C3 


CS| 




















D 


















































CD 


d 

4 


h 








0) 

a 

3 


i-s 


m 

3 
u 

3 

<5 


u 
<D 

a 



ft 

CD 
X 


u 

<0 
O 

"S 
O 


U 

a 

<D 
> 
O 


CD 

s 

o 



P 





44 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May 



•Qaqsng iad 


in 


OS 


a 






c; 


g 


o 


r~. 


^ 


c 


OB 


"*. 


'iiiOflaj^ 'J8inB8;g) TUOQ 




CO 


r^ 










r- 




i- 








•(pnnoj J9d 


-St- 


r~ 


t» 


i— 


c-. 


OS 


HO 


« 


(M 


00 


■* 


■* 


CO 
CO 


'paxnoog 'ap^iQ % '% 


S2 


<M 


N 


<M 


rt " 


_ 
















aoaa^j ranipejf oiqo) I°°M 


*# 


"* 


"tf 


"* 


** 


•*■ 


^r 


■>* 


T 








•(punoj iad 'Sutjp 


fe 


c-. 


W 

o 


•a 


CM 
IQ 




'Tl 






•i 


- 


CO 


CO 


-pipj spn^dn) non'oQ 


6- 


00 


OS 


OS 


OS 


oa 


OS 


00 


00 


X. 


oo 


00 


oo' 




o 


<r 


L~ 


« 


1-- 








o 




o 


a 


<o 


■(UO£ J8d 'OAO^g) pOO 




o 




~ 




1 


1 


1 




1 
















T* 






































— 










•(punoj 


m 


M 


ec 


eo 


co 


eo 


CO 


CO 


CO 


w 


?? 


c: 


o 


J3d 'Suopo BSOUMO.J) ■eaj, 


o 


c-t 


CO 


CO 


CO 


.-t 


CO 


z-- 


CO 


cc 


ec 


ec 


eo 




o: 










^ 


^ 


^ 


N£ 


^ 


^ 


^ 


t— 


•(pnnoj iad 'oty;) sagoQ 


C"5 

o 


L.- 




i-- 


>fl 










<* 


-* 






•(punoj 


OQ _ 


L~ 


~. 


£: 


■* 


•^r 


^r 


^- 


T 


L- 


cc 




CO 


id d 'pa^mrexQ) isSng 




"* 


-* 


-* 


-* 


" 


-* 


* 


" 


•<*< 


■* 


"* 


* 


•(pnnoj 


-2 


C3 


^ 


£ 




05 


« 






^ 

N 


M 




t— 
CSI 


iad 'sioq^ 'Son) suieh 




























•(ptmoj 


jbS 


E- 


?. 


t>- 


oo 


oo 


OS 


( 


oa 


( 


OJ 


C5 


OO 


I 8 d 'P8SS9IQ) 3[ I O J 


D 


























•(pnnoj idd 'SJ85. 


95 \f" 


r^ 


<N 




c5i 




^ 

-+ 


"* 


i--: 


ia 




es» 


CO 
CO 


-ranfr putH 's^ioqg) jaag 




























•(jaxrEg; iad '^tra^j 


o 


<-- 

CM 


>a 


o 


<M 


U5 


o 


o 


l.- 


ia 


« 


L-: 


o 


Suiidg pxBptreq.g) xno^ 


4© 


■* 


"tf 


TH 


-5- 


-* 


"* 


rt< 


"* 


-* 


■* 


■<* 






























o 




O 


CO 


»a 


EC 


O 


a 


(M 


t— 


o 


CQ 


CO 


L- 


f^ 


•(jaqsng; iad) saoiB^oj 


00 

£ 


OO 


OO 






<=-■ 


OS 


i^~ 




1-" 




C- 


o 


•(punoj 


"§C5 


a 


c 




\N 


~x 


_" 






~: 




CI 


«* 


1 9 d 'p8iiH _t i S8j i;) i^oj 




























•(laqsng 


o 


— 


o 


c 


CC 


o 


a 
oo 


= 


§ 






CO 


CO 


iad 'Bed ?[iox M£S[) stiBag; 




co 


<M 


^ 


^ 


- 


^ 


e<i 


<M 


C<I 


cq 


CO 












\N 




N « 














I- 


•(U9ZOQ 


s<o 


00 


00 


»T5 


to 


t^ 


y- 


X 


~ 


^ 


-r 


o 


J8d 'S^SIt^ TUa^Sa,^) S2§3 


3^ 


























•(punoj iad 


3^ 


ec 


t- 




CO 


CO 


£ 


c 


O 


CO 


•<* 


t^ 


o 

si 


'XrauiBaiQ qi-iojsj;) janng 


























a 


























£ 


























o 


























£ 


























§ 


























>H 


























-< 


























o 


























§ 


























a 
























aj 


H 




» 














t_ 






fe SP 


I 


>> 
as 

3 

a 

•-5 




o 

C3 


'u 

< 




o 
a 

3 

•-3 


3 

i-a 


00 

3 
bO 

3 
< 


a 

<» 


— 

O 

o 

C 


> 
o 


s 

CD 

P 


> 
< 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



45 



























CO 


s 














£ 






a? 






e£ 


























CO 


io 


IO 


■a 




cc 


CO 


CO 


io 


IQ 


IO 


IO 


Q 


























-2eo 


























O 


CO 


IO 


o 


00 


o 


o 


o 


o 


IO 


IO 


IO 




►^ 


CO 


t^ 


■»*< 


•w 


r^ 


t^ 


t^ 


t^ 


00 


00 


CO 


"** 


"* 


■»* 


tH 


■^ 


•»* 


"* 


-<Jt 




■>*< 


■* 




5«N 


OS 






CM 






IO 


r~ 




CD 


00 


CO 


g « 


•o 




IO 


■^< 


■»J< 




f^ 












3* 


OS 


o 


o 


3 


CM 


CM 


N 


N 


OS 


^ 


-] 


^ 


§ 


§ 


o 


o 


o 






o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


lr^ 




io 


CO 


r~ 


00 


OS 












o 


*-" 


ec 


■* 


T* 


■# 


-* 


■* 


io 


io 


IQ 


IO 


S 


w 


























CO 
























CO 


























co 


co 


eo 


CO 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


O 


























CO 










SJJ 


3? 


Ngi 


-^ 


N» 




Vf* 


00 


ceo 




eo 


eo 


CO 


















a>^ 


























O 


























iw 






















CO 




0»O 


IO 




CO 






t^ 


~ 


C5 


>o 


IO 


so 


CO 


o"* 


T»< 


"• 


-# 


"* 


« 


■>*< 


TH 


**< 


-# 


"* 


^ 


-*< 


CO^ 


N« 








^ 


\N 


\* 


^ 


^ 






CO 


a £2 


CO 




— 




N 


PS 






B0 


M 




eo 




























O 


























co' 


S 


_- 


S 




sg 








£S 








flOO 


00 


00 


OS 


OS 


00 




1 






^» 




CO 




























O 


























03 




N£ 


£ 




^ 


NN 


v£ 


^ 


\N 


-" 


^ 


IO 


01 *"* 


O 


a 


C3 


o 


















»■* 






*■* 


»-* 


»-' 


»■* 


'- , 


»H 


^-< 


»-' 


»H 


O 


























o 


























co 


CO 


CO 




IO 


sc 




— 


— 


oa 


OS 


OS 


CO 


3 


■* 


^ 


■* 


•** 


"* 


-# 


<# 


IO 


■* 


'S* 


■* 


s 


























CM 














O 














r~ 


[- 




S- 




00 


o 


X 


IO 


io 


CO 




h- 


o 












_, 












O 


























«*# 


ss 




^ 




















Td 


c" 


eo 


CO 




-" 


— < 






M 


— 




— 




CD*"* 


























o 


























m 


o 


o 


© 


L~ 


io 


o 


iO 


O 


o 


o 






■«*< 


•»*< 




CO 






CO 




CO 


-r 


CM 




CO 


cm 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 










































»K 


i 
























t^ 


rJCO 




DO 


IO 


5C 


CO 


— 


ec 


o 


CM 


cc 


























CM 




o 


























3S 






X 


\N 


\N 


\N 


3? 






^ 




CM 


rN 
















8 


CM 






















-5 


CM 


CM 


CM 


u 


















































© 


















fa 






u 

CD 

XI 

B 

© 

w 

CD 

P 


bO 


eS 

3 

a 
3 

►-5 


>> 

I 


— * 
g 

S3 


a 
<1 


c8 


CD 

a 

a 




3 
3° 


CD 

E 

s 

- 

D 

QQ 


2 

o 
O 


CD 

— 

s 

CD 

> 

o 


C3 
CD 

<1 



46 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 






•(jaqsng; jad 


03 

fios 


OS 


CM 


OS 


CO 


CO 




CO' 


£ 


X 


S 


c?q 


s 


'Avo]pj^ 'jaraBa^g) hioq 


S"5 












UO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 




CO 


•(punoj jad 


-iiieo 


CO 


CO 


CO 


o 


00 


IO 


o 


o 


o 


eq 


^ 


OS 

CO 


'pamoog 'apeaQ % >y x 


§«5 


eo 


CO 


CO 


t^ 


t~ 


O0 


o 


o 


o 


cq" 


CO 




aoaa^ mnipajv oiqo) 1°°M j 


o 




"* 


"* 


"* 


















•(ptmoj jad 'Sui[p 


fl"* 


CO 

oo 


^ 


o 


- 


LO 


IO 

00 


CO 

C2 


5 


eo 


oo 

OS 


CO 


o 


~P!H spa^ld]}) uo^oQ 


o3 


21 


IO 


>* 


M 


a 


o 


o 


a 


o 


C5 


t«- 


CM 




o 


o 


© 


o 


O 


o 


o 














•(UOX I8d '8AO^g) pjoo 








io 






00 


a-. 


o 


o 


o 


o 


OO 




IO 


IO 


uo 


>* 


"* 


>* 


-* 


<* 


IO 


IO' 


IO 


IO 


^ 


•(punoj; 


flCO 


CO 




co 


oo 


co 












§5 


o 


jad 'SUOpO ■BSOUIJOJ) T39J, 


u 


Cq 


<M 








c^ci 


CM 


tN 


eq 




cq 




i^ 


X 


S 


S 


^ 


s; 


X 


^ 


X 


S 


^ 


^ ! 


t^ 


•(ptmoj jad «oia) ^S°0 


gCO 

O 
















CO 


eo 


eo 


CO 


CO 


•(punoj 


(3 co 


CO 
CN 


00 


o 
io 


IO 


o 
oo 


IO 


O 

o 


o 

o 


o 

OB 


o 

o 


o 


CO 


i a d 'pa^pureiQ) J-eSng 




"* 


rh 


-* 


* 


* 


•* 


IO 


IO 


•>* 


»o 


IO 


■* 


•(pnnoj 


pjeo 


CO 


CO 


CM 






N 


?q N 


CN 


eq 


s: 




o 
cq' 


jad '8loi{^\. ' So H) sra-BH 




























•(pnnoj 


flCO 


„ 


t~ 


CO 


cc 


IO 




CO 






i> 


S> 


CO 
CO' 


j a d 'passaiQ) ^ioj 


0) 

o 


























•(punoj jad 'sia^ 




$ 


o 


OS 


O 


o 


\IM 


eq 


^ 


S 


C-n 


C3 


o* 


-junft pujH 's+Joqg) iaag; 


CD"- 1 
O 


























•QajJBg; Jad '^uayej; 


o 

CO 


o 

CO 


io 


o 

CO 


IO 

oo 


o 

CO 


IQ 


o 
o 


o 

IO 


IO 

CO 


IO 
IO 


LO 

eq 


oo 


Suudg pxepnB^g) jnoy; 




IO 


IO 


IO 


IO 


uo 


IO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


co 


IO 




























t^ 












o 


o 


o 


o 


IO 


o 


CM 






•Qaqsng; jad) saoc^oj; 




00 


OS 


CI 






IQ 




IO 


IO 


IO 


IO 


o 


•(punoj 


9 

flCO 


co 


CO 


« 






CO 


e-Z 


T^ 




CO 


co 


eo' 


i a d 'pain^-^saj^) I^OlI 




























•(pqsng 


o 


o 
o 


o 

CM 


o 
o 


o 

o 


IO 

oa 


o 
oo 


O 

oo 


o 

oa 


s 


IO 

00 


o 
oo 


OS 


jad 'Baj 3ijoj^ Ai.8jsj) streag 


Cq 


N 


CM 


CN! 


Cq 
















€© 


•(U8ZOQ 


CO 




X 




oo 




l> 


O 




^ 


-f 


00 


o 
co' 


J8d 'S^SJIJ UJa+Sa^) SS§3 




























•(punoj jad 




CO 


IO 


<M 




00 


3d 


3d 


f 


s 


CO 


lO 


f- 


•^jaraBSiQ t^jojn^) jawng; 




























n 

o 


























o 
o 

00 
« 


























& 
























„ 


W 
« 


c3 

s 
a 

c« 

1-5 


3 


o 


a 
< 


i 


CD 

a 


>> 

•-a 


43 

S 
bD 

< 


3 

s 

CD 
■is 
A 

(!) 

CO 


CD 

S 
o 

O 


i 

a 



S3 


u 

CD 

XI 

S 

s 

P 


1 
1 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



47 



























lO 


5^ 


^\ 




^ 






£ 


^ 


* 




X 


JR 


^ 


S«5 




t^ 






eo 


»o 


s 












*a 




IC 


u~ 
















o 


























2c* 

3 s 


oo 


■* 


•* 


oo 


CO 


CM 


est 


CM 


^ 


^ 


oo 


00 


oi 


_l 


^H 


CM 




TJH 


■44 


■^< 


-V 


-v 


CM 


co 


»o 


»o 


»o 


IQ 


UO 


UO 




lO 








lO 


S«3 












IN 


•M 




CO 


CO 






(3 th . 


i~ 




OS 


CN 


os 


*-* 




-co 


CO 


-* 


•- 1 


lO 


a- 


*~ 


X 


t~ 


00 


00 


S 


o 


© 


o 


s 


CN 


oa 














O 




o 


o 


o 


o 


^_ 


o 


o 


o 


»o 


CO 


i- 


co 


OS 










00 


s 


U5 


IQ 


•* 


■*!< 


T* 


•«* 


•* 


«5 


m 


»o 


lO 


s 


i 
























o 


S<M 


























CM 


Ol 


sq 


CM 


CM 


CN 


CM 


CM 


CM 




CN 


CM 


o 


























a3^ 


1? 


SJ, 


- 


^ 


V£ 


^ 


^ 


^ 


^ 


- 


^ 


lO 


CIS 


CO 


EC 


CO 


CO 


















fl}* -1 


























O 


























-So 


























flt- 


o 


OS 


OS 


o 


cc 


•M 


o 


O 


"3 


CO 


-* 


CO 


$"> 


eo 


io 


IQ 


o 


LO 


>o 


»o 


IQ 


■* 


•«*! 


■* 


lO 


«^ 


x^ 






^ 


i^ 


^ 


\# 


esX 


^ 






CM 


«2 


























<D ^ 


























o 


























»x 


^ 


















X0> 


X 


00 


flCO 


CO 














1 




t- 


CD 


CO 




























D 


























-2 


„ 


£ 


\^< 


X 




.« 






^ 




Sg 


rH 


s=^ 






















OS 






























O 


























»n 


lO 




in 


iq 


lO 


o 


»o 


O 


tn 


o 


o 




■* 


•"# 


*->■■ 


■** 


00 


"3 


■<^ 


CM 




i—i 


CO 




OS 




CO 


CO 


CO 


IQ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


»o 


»c 


lO 


IO 


8 


























t^ 


o 


00 


CXI 


00 


CM 


CM 


iq 


IQ 


00 


00 


o 


00 






■»*< 


•»*< 


oo 


CO 


cc 




t"» 






t^ 




•* 


o 




















































i 






















0, 


o 


c2 


T* 


-r 


lO 








Tj< 








CM 






























O 


































o 






















o 


CO 


oo 


■oo 


— 


-CO 


c^ 


l^ 




co 


oo 


«» 
























- 


3 














vg 










CM 






CO 


X 




t^ 




-- 




CM 


«« 






eo 


co 














CM 


CI 


eo 




o 


























05 


£ 




Vg 




_5< 


3s 




^ 


S£ 






Tt< 


§CM 


a> 




t- 


i« 






CM 












CM 




CM 




cm 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


o 


















































aJ 


>, 


£ 














u 

a 

D 

W 








if 


cl 

3 

a 

e8 


2 
— 

Em 


■a 


0. 
< 




CD 

a 

3 


1-5 


r. 

3 

3 


co 

— 
c 
o 

o 


co 
o 


d> 

Q 


> 



48 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



T5 

<v 

a 
'-P 
d 
o 
o 

I 

c> 

>» i 

C5 

I 

i 

5 CO 

■to 

CO 
O 

05 



•(jgijsng .red 


jSX 


N 






X 












» 


t> 





00 


'MO]]a_x_ 'reni^g) uioq 




O 


« 





Ui 


co 


CO 





CO 


l« 


us 






■(punoj jsd 


OB 


O 


















t^ 





1H 


10 


'pajnoog 'apuiQ % '^ 






















CM 


oq 


_; 


9099]^ rampaj^ onjo) POM 


O 


O 


»a 





10 








O 





"3 




•(punog aad 'Smjp 


E^ 






N 


N 




CO 


t~ 


•^: 


l> 


1^ 


LO 

CO 


CM 




~P!K spuBid^l) n o + qi o q 


OS 


















O 


O 








3 




O 


O 


§ 


O 













O 


O 





— 


■* 


•(uox red '8A<ng) paoQ 








O 


to 


co 


oa 
















«3 


O 


O 


O 


"tf 


•* 


■* 


"S 


»o 





in 


ft 


•(pnnoj 


jS 


















S3 


M 


CO 




CO 


red 'Snojoo Bsomjo^) 'bbj, 




CM 


CM 


CM 


cq 


C^l 


CN 


CNJ 


CM 










0B^ 


^ 


£ 


- 


£ 


•^ 


^ 


S 


\c 


» 


xc 


3? 


>o 


•(pnno<j .red 'ot'jj) 99503 


flCO 




to 


CO 


to 





CO 


O 


O 








O 


CO 


CO 


•(punoj 


■2 m 




CO 


Ifl 








IG 


LO 


U3 


us 





10 




j 3 d 'pa^nu'BJ^)) xBSng 





•>* 


■># 


-* 


■<* 


<* 


^ 


^ 


*# 


« 


* 


*i 


Tf< 


•(putlog 


*?:* 


^ 




S£ 


NN 


» 


s? 


X 

















N 




N 


C^l 


co 




tH 








eo 


J9d '9pq^ '§ojj) eraBH 




























•(punoj 


^ 












1 








3! 

CO 




O 
00 


I 9 d 'P98S9JQ) 2[ I O <J 


0) 




























•(punoj J9d 'sreq. 






O 




O 





O 


s; 


CM 


c<» 


?5~ 


CM 


O 


-Jim£) pU|H 'BQJOqg) J99g 


o' rH 

O 


























•(rexreg .red 'q.xreq.'eg 






co 


UO 
00 




00 


O 
co 




CO 








O 




CO 



t> 






os 


Suudg p.repTreq.g) Jnoj^j 


ft 


■* 


** 


-* 


-* 


rH 


W 


-* 


-* 


* 


-* 


T(H 


©K 
















§ 




O 









00 


•(reqsng .red) sgo^^oj 








-0 


00 


00 








O 


»o 


LO 


">* 


CO 

































mi 


























•(putiog 


OB 

C|CO 


rH 


•* 


**l 


*# 


rH 


«* 




■* 




CO 




CO 


1 a d 'pailH-qeaij) imoj 




























•(reqsng 



00 


"5 



CO 


W 

O 


O 


O 
CO 


c>3 




CO 


KB 


g 


10 




10 


CO 


J9d "edfi ^iox M9^j) smreg 


6© 
























a» 


'(TI9ZOQ 


!» 




CO 


l> 


r^ 




^ 




BO 









o> 


J9d 'S+SIJJ TII9^S9^) sSSg 



















CM 


CM 


C] 


CO 


<M 


•(ptmoj .red 


03 

CI *0 

O 






X 





O 




01 






r^ 




si 


'AreraeaiQ qqjojsj) req.Q.ng 


cm 


CM 


eq 


CM 


CM 


ca 




CN 


C>3 


C-3 


CO 


O 

< 

a 

m 

« 


















































<D 


« 


►4 


JO 


-a 




3 


6 

>~5 


>> 


fcfl 

< 


a 

CJ 

ft 

CD 

02 


CO 

1 

O 


(4 

a 

> 

O 


3 

£ 

s 

Q 


CD 
< 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



49 



























CM 


ro 


^JJ 


^ 








^\ 


\o 


_- 




^ 


Sf 


""* 


§«o 




















SN 


CO 




US 


"5 


"3 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 




■CO 


r*. 


t>. 




o 


























Sb. 


^ 


CO 


CO 


^*< 




CO 


CO 


■^ 


■*< 


eo 


■^ 


00 
«5 


5<M- 


N 
























»a 


LO 


lO 


■a 


"3 


W 


lO 


o 


US. 


»a 


ia 




io 




















CM 






C 00 


b 






o 


O 




BO 


CO 


ia 






O0 


#2 


£ 


~ 


E 


2! 


CO 


M 


M 


CM 


^ 


^ 


m 


3 


§ 


s 


a 
£ 


o 
ia 


o 

ee 


o 


o 

00 


o 
oj 


O 

o 


§ 


o 

CD 


o 
o 


00 




"3 


"3 


"* 


■**< 


■* 


"* 


^a* 


■a 


»a 


o 


IQ 


6% 


"eco 
























o 


























cn 


SN 




6N 


N 


6N 


cq 


CN 


CM 


CI 


C) 


CM 


U 


























ai^ 


„ 


^ 


^- 1 


^ 


^ 


N* 


£ 


^ 


VJ, 


SJ, 


^ 


«a 


3<o 


■^ 


so 


;r 


ee 












































o 




















































a® 


so 


■a 


»o 


so 


cc 


CO 


CO 


SB 


CO 


<x> 


CO 


CO 


q* 


■* 


«* 


■* 


^< 


■^t 


TK 


-# 


" 


** 


"* 


Tjt 


■* 


i 


_? 


S 


^ 


S 


-- 










X 


scs 


-H 


a-* 


T 


IQ 




«# 








«* 




co 


CM 


■* 




























O 


























i^ 


























C O0 


OS 


OS 


OS 


00 


00 


00 


CO 


1 


1 


1 


C75 


oo' 


o 


























O 


























2^. 


N* 


- 


_^ 


& 


\^ 














r^ 


G~ 




o 


e 


o 






MS 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CM 






























D 


























o 












o 




O 


O 








r~ 


30 


c© 


55 


X 




t>- 


CO 


cs 


os 


O 




CO 


■* 




-rfi 


■»c* 


— 










































«e 


























CM 








CO 


o 




© 


•M 










3 




SO 


■a 


IQ 


t~ 




■* 


os 


t^ 


CO 


CO 


t- 


o 


















































CO 
















\N 










<* 




























fl"2 


















>a 


CM 


^■^ 


Tj< 




























O 


























o 


o 


w 


«« 


t^ 


o 




BS) 


US 


















■*. 




t*. 


t^ 


OS 








00 


























e© 


> 




\N 








\N 


sr , 


























-S 
















CS 


00 




CO 


-~r 


f- 




cm 
























CM 


N 


N 


1 1 




O 


























i 






X 




£ 


r. 






^ 


\N 




CM 










r^ 


-<*< 


ia 


»a 


00 










o^ 


















CO 


CM 


Cl 




O 


















































0) 
























0) 

s 
g 

o 

Q 


fcfl 


- 

a 

a 

c3 


>> 
3 

3 




5. 


>> 

s 


s 

3 
| -s 


>-5 




a 

© 

a 

o 
DC 


a> 

S 
o 
O 


CO 

— 





CD 

> 

< 



50 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



1 • 

O 

© 



•Qgqsng; J9d 


05 


co 


Cl 


US 


OS 


eo 




1 




o 




^ 


© 

us 


'AiOnaA 'l9UTB9^g) HIOQ 


















S3 


OS 


eo 


t^ 


00 


•(pnno,j J8d 


i© 


SO 


SO 


t» 


eo 


co 


eo 


^ 


O 


o 


o 


o 


OS 


'paxnoog 'apBJQ y 2 '% 


?<->' 


co 






t^ 


t^ 
















aoaajj uinipaj\[ oiqo) I°°M 


6" 5 


"* 






TJ- 


>* 


-* 


-* 


US 


us 


US 


US 




•(ptmoj I3d 'Sutjp 




US 


O 


co 
o 


CO 

OS 




CI 


CO 
CO 


CI 

co 


CO 


"* 


a 


© 


"PIH epu'B^dfx) aonoQ 


O- 


3 


S 


o 


o 


™ 


a 


o 


C75 


OJ 


03 


OS 


© 




8 


§ 


§ 


o 
















8 




•(UOX Wd *9A<ng) p30Q 


m 


eo 


l- 


00 


OS 


O 


o 


o 


oo 




U 


us 


UO 


"* 


"* 


■* 


-* 


">* 


kO 


us 


lO 


US 


e» 


•(pnnoj 


02 




















a 




© 


jad 'Suopo 'Bsoraioj) 139X 


g^ 

o 


C} 


CM 


Cl 


CJ 


C5 


C-J 


CI 


CO 


CO 


CO 


(M 




ax 


£ 


s; 


vj; 


x ? , 


^ 


£ 


\c<> 


X 


£ 


» 


X 


US 


•(punoj J8d 'org) 99jjoq 


as 
O 


CO 






CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


eo 


eo 


CO 


CO 


CO 


•(punoj 


-2 U5 


us 


US 


us 

CM 


>o 


o 

CO 




s 


O 


us 


us 


us 


<M 


isd •pa^'epu'BiQ) jBSng 


o 


-* 


TH 


UJ 


»o 


m 


Iffl 


US 


-* 


«* 


■* 


*<*< 


"* 


•(punoj 


i^ 




O 






$ 


CO 


eb 


CO 


eo 


C3 


o 


oo 


i9d 'aioq^ 'Sojj) stuBij 






















































US 


•(punoj 


a°° 


t~ 


t^ 


00 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


l 


1 


1 




i a d 'passaiQ) 3[ i o <j 


co 

O 


























•(pnnoj jad 'saai 


i^: 




O 


CJ, 


N 


CM 




co 


cV 




\^ 


C] 




-renft puiu 's^ioqg) J9sg 


CC"* 

u 


























•QeiJBg; J8d ''jua^Bjj 


o 

CO 


o 


o 

CO 


o 

00 


o 


O 


8 


© 

UO 


o 

o 


o 


8 


s 


s 


3audg pxBpumg) Jno]j 


© 


US 


CO 


US 


CO 


eo 


eo 


CO 


CO 


co' 


us 


CO 


© 




CO 


US 


CO 


CO 


o 


-CO 


O 


cq 


>-o 


© 


© 


© 


© 


•(pqsng; i9d) sgocj.b^oj; 


g 












-' 








00 




00 

2 




























us 


•(punoj 


fl lM 


eo 


CO 


CO 


>o 


US 


~r 


»!< 


"* 


-f 


CO 






j a d 'panj^-qsai j) pwo^j 


O 


























■(pqsng 


o 

CO 


US 

CO 


o 


o 


o 

eo 




o 


J§ 


o 

CO 


US 


© 


© 


© 


jad 'B9<i 5{JOjt ^»N) su-eag 


CI 


CO 


CO 


<M 


M 


CJ 


CI 


CN 


CO 


CO 


CM 


co' 




•(U8ZOQ 


73 






CO 


t^ 


l-~ 




o 


o 


CO 






^- 


J8d 'S^SIIjJ UJ9^S9^V) s33g[ 






CJ 










CI 


CI 


CJ 


CO 


CO 


(M 


•(punoj i9d 


00 

"Soo 


C] 




o 


CO 


Iffl 


co' 


ee 


us 




X 




eo 
o.' 


*^j9ui'B9io q^iojvj) i9Wng 


§<ro 


CO 




CO 














CO 


CO 


CM 


1 • 


























o 


























§ 


























£ 




















































§ 


























PS 


























P 
























OJ 


H 




u 
3 




















£ 8P 


i 


>> 

cl 

a 

1-5 


o 


ft 

< 




a 


•-8 


09 

S 
M 

P 

< 


^2 

s 

-2 
ft 


U 

3 



a 

CD 

> 
o 


s 

Q 


> 

< 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



51 



























s 


s^ 


X 


X 


^ 


x 








^ 




-\ 






%% 




























t>. 




oo 


oo 


00 


oo 


00 










o 














































































a i 




















































O 


























^ , 


























a " 


























<0 


























O 


























S 


8 


s 


o 

US 


3 


o 


o 

00 


e 
en 


O 

o 


§ 


§ 


o 
o 


oo 




ia 


IO 


•*< 


^< 


-<*» 


»* 


<• 


lo 


«« 


«5 


IQ 




s 
























»o 


aeo 


























CM 


CM 


CN 


CM 


CN 


CN 


SN 


SN 


ei 


CN 


CN 




6 


























ro^J 


£ 


X 


X 


X 


£ 


NJJ 


•■' 


X 


X 


X 


sg 


o 


a« 


o 


QO 


SO 


CO 


CD 


CO 


ee 


CO 


CO 


co 


O 


CO 




























O 


























3o 






o 




O 


a 


o 


o 






§ 




a"5 


us 


■t« 


-X) 


OJ 


00' 


t» 




ac 


O0 


oa 


























IO 


■<*< 


3^ 


s 


V X 


s 


^ 




S? 


^ 


S 




3* 


_- 


Oi 


QO 








CN 


co 


eo 


M 


M 


K3 




IQ 


cm 




























O 


























2^ 






X 


X 












X 


X 


o 


flN 


00 




00 


00 


1 








1 






a> 




























o 


























5^ 


sg 






£ 


- 


j» 


\« 




V£ 


X 


X 


eo 


a"^ 






















CO 


CM 




























o 


























§ 




a 


o 


a 


o 


e 




a 


o 












■a 






S3 




to 


BO 






eo 


c© 


co 


CD 


ee 


t- 


r^ 


CO 


CO 






CD 


CO 


CO 


























e* 


























eo 


o 


a 


O 


o 


US 


a 


s 


t^ 


IQ 


s 


O 


O 


















t«" 


t>. 


r~ 


t^. 


o 



















































t» 


3 










$ 














O 


fl ec 


-f 


co 


CO 


uO 


CO 


IO 


IO 


S3 


■a 


IQ 




«o 




























O 


























O 


ut 


IS 


in 


a 


U3 


LI 


e 


O 










** 


-s" 










l> 


tx 


IO 




eo 




m 


(M 


CM 


CM 


CM 














































m 




sg 




^ 


SJ, 








X 






o 










co 


cn 


CM 














Jeo 














CN 


CN 


CN 


CN 


cn 


<M 


o 


























2^ 








X 


X 


■£ 




sg 


NO 






U5 












eo 


















eo 






CN 


CN 


CN 


<M 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CM 


6 


















































» 


£ 
S 


a 
3 


J3 


_; 








03 

3 


= 

5 


CO 
— 


J- 

s 

CO 


s 


SP 
3 

> 



A £ 3 < s 



52 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



T3 

§ 



•(jgqsng i9d 

'Ai.Or[9^ 'J8UTB8^g) UJO3 


CJ CO CO CM 

O 





CO 


•(pnnog i9d 
'pgjnoog 'apBiQ y z l % 
aoea^ ranipej^ orqo) I°°M 


CO 

"S 1 1 1 



1 


•(punog J9d 'Suijp 
-Vm spu^dfi) uo%%oq 


a 1 1 1 

O 


' 


•(uox Jed '8Aoig) |^oo 


$5.00 
5.00 
5.00 






•(punog 
J9d 'Suopo 'Bsouiao^) "B9J, 


rt lO U5 «3 
JCM CM <M 


O 

CM 


•(punog J8d 'oig) 99503 


3* ^ X 

j- CO co 




co' 


•(punog 
1 9 d 'pg^'epnu'BJQ) xeSng 


Cents. 
5.25 

5.35 

5.40 


CO 
CO 


•(punog 
J9d '9Ioq^ '^°H) sra^jj 


g us 10 co 
O 




US 


•(punog 

J 9 d 'p9SS9JQ) 3[JOj 





CO 


•(punog J9d 'eiaq. 
-ranft puiH 'e^aoqg) J99g 


£CM i-H CM 

O 


r^. 


•(jaxrEg J9d 'iruaireg 
Suudg pxEpui^g) -morg 


$6.40 
6.15 
6.40 


CM 

CO 

CO* 
6© 


•(pusng J9d) sao^og 


00 

» Ifl U5 
O 


CO 
10 

o" 


•(punog 
j 9 d 'psmsi-^sgjj) \m.o£ 


DO 

C^* CO CO 

O 


CO 

»»' 


•(pqsng 

J9d *139g 3{IOj^ A1.9J^) SUB9g 


$2.30 
2.35 
2.35 


CO 

CO 

cm' 


•(U9ZOQ 

J9d 's^siig ni9^s9^) sSSg 


r< CM O CO 
£JcO CO CM 

U 


CO 

00 
CM 


•(punog J9d 


CJ <# H CM 

q, CO CO CO 




CO 

CM 

CO 


g 




w 

<! 

Q 

« 
P 

w 

H 

e 

« 


January 

February 

March 


> 

<1 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



53 



a 

c 





o 


c 






Oi 


•+^ 




r- 1 


o 




o 


T3 




m 




s 


52 


CD 

o 

Ph 


© 


& 






«0 






DQ 


&h 


c 


<4i 

53 


-e 


eo 


c5 




■fi 


© 




fe 


cr 




>> 


©• 



o § 

s -5 



bfl 

"3 
bfi 

CD 

- 

• — 



DC 

GO 

* 

- 
CU 
> 

c3 



o 



Coal 
(Stove, 

per 
Ton). 


OOMMH--HCDreOOtOlO!DU5l«'n'HK5ClfflO 

(N-cotoi'Oi-ooo^icNmooooaooooxo 


•*-*TfTj'CC«'>»l'*CCTl<T(l'<)HlOlO'*Tf^Tj"*n<lO 


^— • o 


rooocsoeoccioooccoooooooooooo 
jiiononnNOoniaoooooooooioo 


^C^MNC^C^M<NC^(^CCCC1WCC<^CN1C<ICSICS1CN1(NCN| 


O U = 


ninM'toiflono-HOinecoaiisecocoo 


«e 


Sugar 

(Granu- 
lated, per 
Pound). 


TO^OMCOOWOrtMNteieMOOiSNOfJ 
JlOOiaoOCOlO^OfflMO^ONW^OONM 




03 CT 

£ fee 


ir'-HOOiCCiCNCOCSNCtOlOMOOOONNCCMOO 

«XTfM<«:ioNc:r<rtoaxNocNC>H»a.i.'j 


^ T ,„„„- „,H„ rt „„„,. 


^ *-"2 

fc- o c 
O p, 3 

Ph— c 
Ph 


-ii >r; ■<»■ o -^> oo O «o io cs coxiNrtioxoioioOin 


§ui«o>ooiec>«d>ovo«o loexoooxxNCH 


"8 fed 

£3§ 

Ph 


JOho — i — wi © o o *-i *-* i-J eo o i-i — i — i i-i <m' (m' i-i 


^«^„_^ rtrt „„^^_ rt ^„«„ rt „ rt 


111 


"tL«XXN«OMHnWtOCCOHHlflMMO 
is s t C r: M c i.-; n r : : : v: : i - i : - - r. X M h 

^«5 00MWM01«)ihNhO«O00 0>NKO«« 

'-'Ma'<ii') , MMco'<i , >-':'*Tti^'^('*ii5>.'i'<* , iccseo 


03 

Q u, a> 

Ph Ph 


BMMfflMCON(OWlOOWOOiOlOiaWi6MMO 
^mCCOXCC'HCNNOMCNNNXNCMO 


§t^t^cot^octf5o«ccoio»oo5i^-*oa5t^-«t"^oio 

^XCOCXCeMlCOOlflNNNN^COOOONlO 


"3 (h'O 

p o a 

o as 

R w O 

Ph 


ixeMNCCXi5CNX*^**ON*iaOB 




03 cr 

g t- o 

Sft-S 


— ■>* O — NOOOC!00N»H0500NNNN^ i«3CO 
C! L". - CI S - -r C CI i- C M ?1 C ^ - H- K O IN N 

INp;O'-0C0:MC<lTl<t3M!0rtCCC.«)ffl»'<)i«:C0 


C^CKIMC^— rt — — rH — CSCSIC^lCSli-c — T-C— CXICXieKI 


73 L. d 

M a S 


<B ''*SSOC.Cil'tiN»<!(iNOoe^H«(»OfflNlft»M 
^ONNWCSCXNOK^WNNONCONCM 


Fee — Ortex^HieNL«Nce««-<- cm i~ oo 


22 o s 
= 32 

n £ 


^CCCi-ONMNOOlOOMNNClNt^-^INNOL-CO 

8 eo us ie> eo eo ^h a» o> o *-< <m' »-I -# eo i-i ■«* T ■*" oo" •>-" ei «m" 

J"cMesnM(Ncsi(MT-i — (MCVKMirqcsesKMCNiCNicsic^cqeo 


w 

<: 
is 














C — -M cc -r «.- tc i - oo ~* G " — ~i~ bo «* io bo r^ SO cr: © 

c. r. r. - - - - r. - - c c s c c o c o o o - 

X X X X X X Z X X X ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C - . — . — C5 CS Si 



54 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



I 


ooooooooooooooooooo 


NinnHNOOCOOOONCOOlONiHrtOO 
CCNrtO»NN(»OrtrtO>OHiHN(NNrt 


2 

5 


OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 

SlOOONNOONOiNOOHHNOJHOOOO 




"3 
o 
U 


OOeOOi-KNOOrHCOeDOOOOOOOOOINOOOOOOO 


■*rtfflCSNK50w^O)OOMHOq»OS-l©©05M 
OOOOOOOOOOOOi-it*<cO«-<~h<M^h^»--i<NI 


03 

H 


>OH!10lONmNO'-l<*UM(5lO'*OOOOOlON 
NtBNWO®00®®0010><»>0®»(0(0®000 


0«>HOSNCCOtl5(OlOaiOSO»OCi5CJMCOC0050 
000»01»0)OOONrtHHOOO«OOMOOOOO) 


6 

& 

o 
O 


'«®COT)lOSCOOO'<( , NNiHNHOO'-l'-IHTHrti-l»< 

wio»»N»Hoo^NoeiiNeNOoooooo 


ooot^^co^Ht^-^-^oeoiooiMt^t^t^t^i^t^r^ 

0500 OO OOOOOOiOCOOOOOOCO 




00 00(0(DOONr-l^t*OOOONCO'*mcOeClO!0^' 
■^NOOiaiOlOOONOrtfflTtlNNMCOMOOKlOai 


e"*NOCOMr(iNr(HNOiON«OOOCOeNOSO 
WOO)OMWOSO)OOrtO«0)0)H©000>H 


a 

o3 
W 


CflOH»0!NNlONmtOrtlM©^0)»Nne!0 
>0>5lON00H00lI50!ec<3HNNHl000O0!»rt 


0>(D<*D0lO»OMC0(MNONlO00M*O0000M 

oioiONOOJOOiooosOOrtNrtOHnOHTji 


1 


MCCtOHOTflltlN^ OOOHOMOitOlSH^ 
!>. ifj CO i- 1 t- CO CO ■>* US O t— **l O CO O t~- OO CO «D O 


t>. l« 00 00 t^- *# 00 CO CNJ -HNCCilOCOCDlOMtOCqN 
OO 00 00 "* O O OO 00 00 OO <M O 00<M CO i-H "* OO 


03 
© 

n 


00>M>0'*OOiOC<IN'*00'HCO'HOO!DlOM<OOOC» 
Mrt(CK5®(MNNrt!erHO>OOOrt'^1000 10'ilH 


rtNOO^rtMCCNlONOOHlOOHOtDONO 
OOOOOOOOOOOOCXIOOOOO-mi-iO 


o 

K 


OOHlO^MOOOffiN^OONONPSKlOfflO 


OOOU5KlWN®lOINrtO)l»rtOtOCBtONHOON 
■HNOO)»«»OHfflOO«)ROININOrtC«raW 


03 03 

P-c^ 


NNH^TtOOOOO©rHr-lNN(eiNONffiC»Offl 


IM(MON»OilOOOO>®OOrtrtOrtNOJI»INtHOO 


"5 
o 
ft 


N»ooMinHO><o-*oO'*o)*'*(»NeoioH 


00lCCNlC<|C<I00COO5->#»-lCOO5«OC0CO005O(M-*t^O5 

OhhhoCoO)CCIOOO>OONO!HHHHMhINN 


03 

a 

03 

IP 

n 


t>.CS]<M-<*lOOCOOC<MO'--<^t^0001>.C<5t--<M-*Ot~ 


isootD'jiiomioceoacctotoooJOOtoooN 

NNHHOONCDNO>N-*rt(NOfflO)0«ti3IN 


M 
M 




OOONOl^ONIMCOOfflffliOOOCDINOfflON 




as 


NTtlrt(NNOCOM»'HNONmOtDM'HMCqfii 
ffltOaOO^eOlNNeS^NO-iliOOOMMWN 


(DOOONeOOOHOTOfflOltOO'-O^CTjlN 
O-H'-'CXIOOOOOOOOOOOO'-H— <C3C<)CO-^ 


K 














0—<eMcoT»<iocor^ooc20>-*c^cO'<*iioccf~ao050 

0505O050505C5O0505OOOOOOOOOO-m 

0000000000000000000002000050505030500 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



55 






I 



Wool 
(Merino 
Adelaide 
Average 
Grease). 


"*NnM®U5OM0000OO^»-<fflMrtOM 


rtO»000000»OroMOHNNM'J<'>*lf)')l 




e<i-H^o«o»c-«t^oot^t^oo^-ioocct^o»^«o«o 




Coal 

(Wallsend 
Helton in 
London). 


*!ONrtMNNONNCOMNMOO«CCOrtOOO 


OOOrtO)OCOOOOOCO-HOfflO!OOOHOO 


Tea 

(Average 

Import 

Price). 


NSN»WNO)0!O^ON»HNNOS*OlO 


OOOCJ050505050S05XNNNNNNOOOOOO 


Coffee 

(Rio, 

Good 

Channel). 


acoNtooscooioicoin^orcoioooo* 


MNCSOOO»*rtO'*lCOOO»'*NOOlO 
CCNOCCNrtOS©K5U510ir3«3T(<U5®(OlOi:u5 


Sugar 

(British 

Westlndies 

Refining). 


0'*->J'050005'*Tfl!eMOO'*00)rtCO!SMOO-H 


-iw-.N0500»00000!»00*NOOO!NNMW 


Pork 

(Large 

and Small 

Average). 


OONOJ(DlOOM>OC5rtll5t<5<»"«NNMOlNP5 


oo-*e^r~coir~c^CMO-«<coiocqco^-iooioio.^»o 

OSO-h-hOOOOOOOCSO-H'-OOO^OO— i 




oooi-oONO»NioNOHHOOM»e 


©OOCJOOlOOt^-^CC-^x^lMtMOO^O© 

OOOOOOOOOsOO©— <©0©O©.-(,-< 


Flour 
(Town- 
made, 
White). 


^ooowOffio-HO^OTtusNtDeTji^us^ 


K50-iTjiOMOOO!OOtD'*OOC<5WCClO'*10 
0«COOO»OOINOCC10)»COOO-HIN 


Jst 

tea 


NWNMNrt^NCSNCCKOONOWON'OO 


NNNON-CDNMNOOOOlCOinOnNNH 

oNesoffi^Nci-oooortNooN^ei 


Butter 
(Friesland, 

Fine 
to Finest). 


ooooosiaasoooooooHOHTH 




Year. 
















C - ^ ?: -r c x i - z, r. C - M re t c s n x a 
ci c. c- — . — - ~ — — — . — — ~ — o o c; c; o o 

'X X 00 DO 0C X X X X X C". — C-- C". C: OS C~. C: Ci O 



56 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



In order to compare Boston wholesale prices with English, 
the quotations have been reduced to index numbers on a base of 
100 as the average price for 1890-99, and index numbers for 
the Sauerbeck figures of English prices for similar commodities 
have been computed on the same basis. The comparison could 
not be extended to include all the fifteen commodities in the Bos- 
ton list, on account of differences in the two tables. The index 
numbers for cotton and wool have been taken from the Bureau 
of Labor statistics. The comparative figures are given in the 
two preceding tables. 

The averages of the index numbers of the eleven commod- 
ities that appear in both lists are brought together in the follow- 
ing table, and the comparative price movement is graphically 
exhibited in the accompanying chart. 









Comparative Boston and English Wholesale Prices. 




Year. 


Boston. 


English. 


Year. 


Boston. 


English. 


1890, . 


114.3 


111.1 


1900, . 


103.8 


105.1 


1891 










110.7 


110.9 


1901, 






102.2 


97.2 


1892 










101.1 


104.2 


1902, 






108.6 


94.7 


1893 










110.8 


106.7 


1903, 






104.0 


98.6 


1894 










96.5 


96.6 


1904, 






107.5 


101.6 


1895 










91.8 


94.9 


1905, 






104.8 


98.7 


1896 










88.0 


83.1 


1906, 






106.3 


100.4 


1897 










91.3 


92.6 


1907, 






110.6 


106.2 


1898 










96.7 


93.9 


1908, 






112.2 


102.5 


1899 










100.0 


95.2 


1909, 






- 


105.7 



The close parallel between the Boston and the English prices 
is striking. The Boston number for 1908 was 27.5 above the 
low point of 1896, and the English number for 1909 was 27 
above. This showing suggests the reflection that the discrep- 
ancy between the advance of prices in this country and in Eng- 
land would perhaps be less than it seems to be according to the 
usual comparisons, if the same commodities and the same base 
of average were used in the two cases. The index numbers of 
the Sauerbeck tables, which are commonly used for such com- 
parisons, are based on the average prices of the period 1866-77. 



s 


mm 


imiiiii 


u±u±p 




i.ji • liil' 1 

llllllll 4— 


Sffi=j 


*• 


M , i ■ ■ 


. ■ ; ■ i ' ;■!: 


— P 


4w 


4444-4- 

I i 1 | -M 


Ml 1 


* 


ill 


l -=t :: 4 




#W- 


-^yr 


TO=I"E 


t ::: ±g 


"s. 


-| 


■4 




n1 ' - 


#^ 


w\$M 




i 

Iff 


M 


7—1 


-j — f- 


-fftl 


4-i-U- 


r 

44tt 


|4j 


-H — r 

-LU4- 


±4M ±E 

xx:xp+:- 


t::iE::3 

Sit— 


9* 

i 

a* 


-i — [4- 



.. ' : 1 


4-144 

, rr 


i 

Wa 


m 


444 

i ! !' 
i i i 


m 

m 

V 

J -A 


'zz^llzlllzll 

77 

4444-44-4 — 

1 1 i i 7l_X 
j ii j 


tTHT — "1 
i i 

# 

; i i 


>- 


j 1 1 1 

4444 

- ' 


j 
4|44 


1 


: 1 Jr' 


4J4- 
ilLL 


> i i il i 
444+ -4+4—— 

i ' i .■ . n- 

7^ h -f- X. 

44 M 
4444-— - 


:4z=r=: 
^T : 4" 

1 — 




Hfj: 


1 ! 




#i 


|p 


itq 


£xt =:= x== : 


- 


<*> 


-till 


1 1 1 1 


II 1 1 


| I ! : 1 


#1 


^"X" 


m 


nfA 






WW; 


4444- 


1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
1 1 




1 ' i~~n 


±fl* 


-rfeU-iiit 11 ^ 


fS :== 




mm 

■ ■ • ■ ■ i ; 1 

i i 1 i 1 i i ii ' 


4444 

1 1 1 1 

1 


! 1 ! . 

44 

! ' ri 


w 


ijj-L 

1 


[444 

4444- 

i j+2 


4|m- 

1 Bf r* 5[ 


m 

1 ! 


CO 


•• 

'I'M l; : 
; ; j ' i i : 1 ' 


i ! 1 

■frr: 

4444" 


WW 


I 


44±k 
44-5 


'ill 


4I+T4T+TT 

1 I'll — 1 r 

-i-fj- -" 


i ' i 1 - 
W = = = 

::::::± 


Kt 


tnf 


ffi* 


1 1 1 1 


j-M-i- 


75 




p 


tww 


- = I^ :: 


6« 




-r-^ — 








l# 


H i 1 


T+ 


-4-44- 






4 


i 


— 144- 


jtj+ 






— 


44- 


III 


1 1 1 


::±:::::::i 




>- 


fl 


i: 


m 


m 


4f|f 


4 


44 

■ 


4444444— 


fe%W 


X 



s $ 



* s a 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 57 

In the present comparison new index numbers have been com- 
puted for the English prices, on the base of the 1890-99 aver- 
ages employed in the Bureau of Labor tables. The use of the 
same base and the selection of similar commodities from the 
English and the American lists make this comparison more 
accurate than those in which differences of base and of commod- 
ities come into play to affect the results. 

B. RETAIL PRICES. 

Statistics of retail prices in the United States from 1890 to 
1907 are given in bulletins of the United States Department 
of Labor. The last retail price Bulletin, No. 77, issued in 
July, 1908, presents the retail prices of 30 staple food com- 
modities, as sold in 68 localities in the United States, by 1,014 
dealers. It appears from the figures that the average prices of 
20 of the 30 articles were higher in 1907 than in any other 
year of the period 1890-1907. Furthermore, the price of 
every article except coffee was higher in 1907 than in 1896, 
the low-price year, and in the case of 16 of the 30 articles the 
1907 price was more than 25 per cent, above the 1896 level. 
The advances of some of the leading articles over the 1896 
prices were : bacon, 62.7 per cent. ; potatoes, 56.6 per cent. ; eggs, 
48.4 per cent.; salt pork, 47.9 per cent.; fresh pork, 46.3 per 
cent.; lard, 45.1 per cent. The following table shows the per- 
centage of increase or decrease in retail prices of the principal 
articles of food in 1907 as compared with seventeen preceding 
years : — 



58 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



I 



a, 

o 



i> co n m m n oo tc rt '^e^coT^oo^r^c^-^Hco'^cociioeoe^rH ' — i ^h 

'+ + 



+++++ ++++++++ 



++ 



+ + 



+ + 



++++++ 






I++ 



++++ I 



)iH^oortqoqfflo;Mqrtrtu'5-*i-iqtoin'Hqoooooo<oq 



I++ 



NfoqqiOTH«MqNqcoq^NqoM*qq(Nqcoq«MmqN 

00^^00^»CC005^rJ<<>3 0(»O^CO^«C5o'oOodcOt>^^CCrt^O 

' I++ 






CO CO CM Oq Od 05 *— I NCOTtiMNIN 



I I++ 



eqw<»^oo50eo^0^e<i^^^<r<)^t^oo^05t>;ooiqc50^05»qco 
NHiHihh CONN CO CO 05 CM 05 CO rH oq •>*< it; co co oq 



+++ 



!HNOON(N , <)<NCOlfl'-iO-H®OSiOOeiOOlfJrjH<*'*NNCllflN 



-+ | +++ 



-# CM -h CM i-H CO CM CO 



l CO ■* 5© •<* CO CM i— I 



ICDOOCO«IC^^I>-Cq^05--C30COI>;C505000CM — O^JlO 

Ir^idid-3<o6o6o-*i>lu25i5ci-- co oi t^ co co ^ cm co c© id r~ 
co cm co cc ■* n co eg ■* rt co ■«*< eo •* co io 



iN0qNCO00"5CJl0ffl!ON00ONrH0000XO>NMCC*N00L'5 0)«N 
I i-H CM CM 



iincomoooo-HOONintO'^ooooffiKn.oTjioiMNtoi 
iud^cdoocsocdoocqVdco^cdo^cdcci^oicicocccd- 

CMCMCO 03 ->*l 05 -h CO O} t-h .WtIIL'SWNhh 



+++++ 



IHOrt^q^ifjqifjoonrtNNwao^iowciNoq 
cdrtcdo^^or^oicdcdt^ocd-^oait^coO'-Hioioo 

rt(NN CM 05 CM —H CM ,-1 -* CO CO ■<*< CM -H CM -H CM 



lOfflffi-i^rfC-.'-toooLoxoaMciffiex-'XOxai 

C<lT-*rtC<]»-« rtNC^ 05 05 OQ *-h -* OJ -h 05 -<J< lO •* 05 05 Ol 



+++++ 



+++++ 



ICM0300COt-©OO^CO©lOI 



co'—^05'-<cd'<*Oa(M*Ocioo6-H 
_ _< rt CM -h -■* OQ 03 05 01 CM 



oi-H'co-<j<idcd'<i<idc> 






HHHC1H CM O} C5 CO CO CO 05 05 CO' 

+++++++++ ' 



CM © 
00 00 

+ + 



00 CO 

od oi 

+ + 



00 00 

+ + 



+ + 



+ + 



O} CM 

+ + 



05 cm 

+ + 



+ + 



05 OJ 

+ + 



O} CO 

cm oq 

+ + 



oq 05 

+ + 



+ + 



+ + 



+ + 



+ + 






CD H CO GO += ' 

CO »«4H i£ 00 
03 CO 

"a 



■S ..8 






T\ ~ - 3 ?? « 2? 



i: ° c 

■— ca E 



* a ■-•jHtJ. 



W.O303O3O3S.3— j5oo M.E.E, 

<jpqpqeqpqmPQOOOUHEs,EM. 



I.*-*.*.^ c3 



lSS§£M 



o 2«s 



CS -— 03 
M Ci G3 fl 



as -j 
•a & 



xh>> <0 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



59 



Relative Retail Prices of Food, Simple and Weighted Averages, by Geograph- 
ical Divisions, 1890-1907 x {Average Price for 1890-99=100). 









North 
Atlantic 
Division. 


South 
Atlantic 
Division. 


North 
Central 
Division. 


South 
Central 
Division. 


Western 
Division. 


United 

States. 


YEAR. 


6 
"5. 
B 

CO 


.9 

1 


J2 

a 

CO 


•6 


"S. 

a 

'co 


73 

I 


"a 

S 

CO 


1 

T3 

$ 

to 


"a 
£ 

CO 




JZ 
"3. 

a 

CO 


T3 
O 

* 


1890, 


101.9 


102.3 


100.7 


101.2 


102.3 


102.3 


101.1 


102.1 


105.4 


107.7 


102.1 


102.4 


1891, 






102.9 


103.2 


101.5 


102.1 


104.1 


104.5 


102.9 


103.6 


106.2 


108.7 


103.4 


103.8 


1892, 






102.0 


102.1 


100.6 


101.1 


101.7 


101.8 


100.6 


100.7 


104.4 


105.2 


101.8 


101.9 


1893, 






104.3 


104.4 


102.1 


103.2 


105.0 


105.4 


102.9 


103.5 


102.7 


102.9 


104.1 


104.4 


1894, 






99.9 


99.2 


100.3 


100.0 


100.9 


100.6 


99.9 


100.0 


99.4 


99.3 


100.3 


99.7 


1895, 






98.2 


97.7 


99.5 


98.7 


98.3 


98.0 


98.2 


98.1 


97.3 


96.7 


98.2 


97.8 


1896, 






96.2 


97.0 


97.5 


96.8 


94.9 


94.6 


96.2 


96.1 


93.9 


93.2 


95.8 


95.5 


1897, 






96.9 


96.9 


97.8 


97.1 


95.3 


95.6 


97.2 


97.3 


94.2 


92.7 


96.3 


96.3 


1898, 






98.3 


98.8 


99.4 


99.3 


98.1 


98.4 


99.9 


98.8 


96.7 


95.2 


98.5 


98.7 


1899, 






99.3 


99.5 


100.6 


100.5 


99.4 


98.9 


101.0 


99.9 


99.8 


98.5 


99.6 


99.5 


1900, 






101.3 


101.2 


102.2 


102.4 


101.7 


100.8 


103.3 


101.1 


100.1 


98.1 


101.5 


101.1 


1901, 






104.4 


104.7 


106.6 


106.9 


106'. 7 


106.1 


108.1 


106.9 


102.0 


99.9 


105.5 


105.2 


1902, 






110.0 


110.5 


110.8 


111.8 


112.1 


111.7 


114.1 


113.5 


106.9 


104.4 


110.9 


110.9 


1903, 






110.4 


110.1 


110.1 


111.2 


112.0 


111.0 


114.0 


113.5 


108.1 


103.7 


110.9 


110.3 


1904, 






111.2 


111.7 


110.2 


111.9 


112.6 


112.1 


115.0 


115.0 


109.4 


104.9 


111.6 


111.7 


1905, 






111.8 


112.1 


111.2 


113.0 


114.0 


113.1 


115.9 


115.9 


110.0 


105.7 


112.5 


112.4 


1906, 






115.2 


114.8 


115.9 


116.2 


117.8 


116.5 


118.9 


119.0 


113.6 


110.1 


116.2 


115.7 


1907, 






119.4 


119.4 


120.3 


122.3 


121.8 


121.2 


124.6 


124.6 


119.1 


116.2 


120.7 


120.6 



1 Bulletin No. 77 of the United States Bureau of Labor, July, 1908, p. 185. 

The movement of retail prices over the period 1890-1907 
is more readily seen when the figures are reduced to index 
numbers. The preceding table gives the index numbers for 
simple and weighted averages of the relative prices of the 30 
articles of food, based oh the average price for 1890-99 taken 
as 100. In the first column of the table under each division 
is given the simple average of the relative prices of the 30 
articles ; in the second, the weighted average according to the 
consumption in workingmen ? s families. 

Following is another table showing the articles for which 
the price in 1907 was higher than the average for 1890-99, 
and also those for which the price for 1907 was lower than 
this average : — 



60 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Relative Retail Prices of the Principal Articles of Food in the United States, 
1907, compared with the Average Price for 1890-99 ! {Average Price for 
1890-99 = 100). 



Articles. 


Relative 
Price 
1907. 


Articles. 


Relative 
Price, 
1907. 


Articles for whi 
in 1907 was hig 
for 1890-99 : — 

Bread, whea 

Vinegar, 

Tea, . 

Molasse3, 

Rice, . 

Beef, salt, 

Milk, fresh, 

Flour, whea 

Beans, dry, 

Beef, fresh, 

Beef, fresh, 

Fish, fresh, 

Potatoes, Iri 

Fish, salt, 

Cheese, 


;h the average 
her than the a\ 

t, . 
unskimmed, 

5, 

"oasts, 

steaks, 

sh, . 


price 
erage 


104.5 
104.5 
105.3 
107.7 
108.5 
114.1 
116.8 
117.7 
118.8 
119.1 
120.6 
120.6 
120.6 
121.6 
123.2 


Apples, evaporated, . 

Veal, 

Butter, 

Mutton, 

Pork, salt, ham, .... 

Chickens (year or more old, 

dressed). 
Corn meal 

Lard, 

Eggs, . . . . . 

Pork, salt, dry or pickled, . 

Pork, fresh, .... 

Pork, salt, bacon, 

Articles for which the average price 
in 1907 was lower than the average 
for 1890-99: — 

Sugar, 

Coffee, 

Prunes, 


124.6 
125.0 
127.6 
130.1 
130.7 
131.4 
131.6 
134.2 
137.7 
141.2 
142.5 
157.3 

99.6 
95.0 

88.4 



Bulletin No. 77 of the United States Bureau of Labor, July, 1908, p. 190. 



According to this table, the price of all articles except sugar, 
coffee and prunes was higher in 1907 than the ten years' 
average. Bacon rose 57.3 per cent. ; fresh pork, 42.5 per cent. ; 
eggs, 37.7 per cent. 

It is interesting to compare the course of retail prices with 
that of wholesale prices. In general, retail prices are less 
responsive to the influence of economic changes than are whole- 
sale prices. When wholesale prices are falling, retail prices 
lag behind noticeably; when wholesale prices are rising, retail 
prices follow more closely, but still somewhat more slowly. 
Retail prices, however, respond much more quickly to an up- 
ward movement than to a downward. It is natural that retail 
dealers, when wholesale prices are falling, should delay mark- 
ing down their goods to their customers, in the expectation 
that prices may again advance, or in the effort to retain for 



RELATIVE WHOLESALE AND RETAIL PRICES OF FOOD IN THE 
ATES, SIMPLE AVERAGES, 18 

{Average price for 1890 to 1899-100.! 



nUATIVt 
PRICfS 


1820 189! 1892 1893 ,'894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1901 !90d I9GS 1906 1907- 


122 

120 
118 
116 
114 
112 
110 
108 
106 
104 
102 
100 
98 
95 
94 
92 
90 
88 
86 
84 
82 


















i 










i 




i 
















1 










s 






i 


























J 






i 
















1 










/ 






















! 










I i 
































1 ' J 






















1 










t7 
































A / 




















J 














' \i 


































/ \f 




| 




























„j 


' / 




| 


























^^~ 


^* 


_A_ 




! 




















fj 








/ i 


























i A 








/ 








\ \ L 
















h 




































L 






































r~ 


































A 
















1 \ 


















/ / 
















* '* ■ 


* 


\ V 














/ 




















\ 


/ 


\ \ 












1 


/ 
























\\ 












1 , 






































y 




























l\ 








,' 


1 


























\ 1 






, 


** 












_ 




















\ 






/ 










i 




















\ 






/ 
































*" 




/ 




































/ 




















| 








t 




i 






























tz 




^Ir- 




























l\ 




1 ! 






























1 




/ 










i i i 












pi 




/ 1 


1 








! 1 ! 


; 










± 




/ ! 










_ 1 : 














ZT 


" 1 

1 












. 














zr 


rz 










i 


1 






! 






— \ 


/ 


! ! 








^ 
















\ 


z~ 


1 1 __ 








I 






















1 




























1 












s 














1 















Wholesale. 



Retail 



I 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



61 



themselves as long as possible the gain resulting from reduc- 
tion of the wholesale prices. The following table shows the 
relative wholesale prices of food and the relative retail prices, 
both given in simple averages : — 

Relative Wholesale and Retail Prices of Food in the United States, 1890- 
1907 l {Average Price for 1890-99 = 100). 

[The wholesale prices are from Bulletin No. 75 of the Bureau of Labor, and are simple averages 
of 53 articles from 1890 to 1892 and 1904 to 1907, and of 54 articles from 1893 to 1903. The retail 
prices are simple averages of 30 articles.] 



Year. 


Relative 

Wholesale 

Prices of 

Food. 


Relative 
Retail 

Prices of 
Food. 


Year. 


Relative 

Wholesale 

Prices of 

Food. 


Relative 
Retail 

Prices of 
Food. 


1890 


112.4 


102.1 


1899 


98.3 


99.6 


1891, 








115.7 


103.4 


1900, 








104.2 


101.5 


1892, 








103.6 


101.8 


1901, 








105.9 


105.5 


1893, 








110.2 


104.1 


1902, 








111.3 


110.9 


1894, 








99.8 


100.3 


1903, 








107.1 


110.9 


1895, 








94.6 


98.2 


1904, 








107.2 


111.6 


1896, 








83.8 


95.8 


1905, 








108.7 


112.5 


1897, 








87.7 


96.3 


1906, 








112.6 


116.2 


1898, 








94.4 


98.5 


1907, 








117.8 


120.7 



Bulletin No. 77 of the United States Bureau of Labor, July, 1908, p. 195. 



The comparative movement of wholesale and retail prices, 
as shown by the foregoing table, is exhibited graphically by the 
accompanying price curves. These curves bring out strikingly 
the difference in movement of wholesale and retail prices. 
Retail prices did not drop to the low level reached by whole- 
sale prices in 1896, nor did they fall with wholesale prices in 
1903. On the other hand, they did not quite hold the pace 
of the advance of wholesale prices in 1893, and in the recent 
rise since 1903 they have moved upward in somewhat less 
degree than wholesale prices. 

The significance of the advance of retail prices for the cost 
of living is shown by the statistics of family expenditures 
given in the eighteenth annual report of the United States 
Commissioner of Labor, 1903. This report gives detailed 
family expenditures for 2,567 workingmen's families in 1901. 
Assuming that the expenditure for each of the various articles 



62 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



bore the same relation to the total expenditure for food in each 
of the other years of the eighteen-year period covered by this 
investigation as in 1901, we find that the average cost for food 
per family in 1907 was $374. 75, as contrasted with $296.76 in 
1896 and $359.53 in 1906. The difference between 1896 and 
1907 amounts to 26.3 per cent. 

Average Cost per Workingman's Family, by Geographical Divisions, for 
Each Year, 1890-1907} 



[Based on the average cost per family in 1901 and the course of retail prices of food as indicated 
by the relative prices weighted according to family consumption.] 


Year. 


North 
Atlantic 
Division, 

1,415 
Families. 


South 
Atlantic 
Division, 

219 
Families. 


North 
Central 
Division, 

721 
Families. 


South 

Central 

Division, 

122 

Families. 


Western 
Division, 

90 
Families. 


United 

States, 

2,567 

Families. 


1890, 




§330.35 


$282.72 


$310.08 


$279.54 


$332.61 


$318.20 


1891, 










333.26 


285.23 


316.75 


283.64 


335.72 


322.55 


1892, 










329.70 


282.44 


308.57 


275.71 


324.90 


316.65 


1893, 










337.13 


288.30 


319.48 


283.37 


317.80 


324.41 


1894, 










320.34 


279.36 


304.93 


273.79 


306.68 


309.81 


1895, 










315.50 


275.73 


297.05 


268.59 


298.65 


303.91 


1896, 










313.23 


270.42 


286.74 


263.11 


287.84 


296.76 


1897, 










312.91 


271.26 


289.77 


266.40 


286.29 


299.24 


1898, 










319.05 


277.41 


298.26 


270.50 


294.01 


306.70 


1899, 










321.31 


280.76 


299.78 


273.51 


304.21 


309.19 


1900, 










326.80 


286.07 


305.54 


276.80 


302.97 


314.16 


1901, 










338.10 


298.64 


321.60 


292.68 


308.53 


326.90 


1902, 










356.83 


312.33 


338.57 


310.75 


322.43 


344.61 


1903, 










355.54 


310.65 


336.45 


310.75 


320.27 


342.75 


1904, 










360.70 


312.61 


339.79 


314.86 


323.97 


347.10 


1905, 










362.00 


315.68 


342.82 


317.32 


326.44 


349.27 


1906, 










370.72 


324.62 


353.12 


325.81 


340.03 


359.53 


1907, 








385.57 


341.66 


367.37 


341.14 


358.87 


374.75 



i Bulletin No. 77 of the United States Bureau of Labor, July, 1908, p. 197. 



Records of retail prices in Massachusetts for different years 
from 1860 to 1907 are furnished by the reports and bulletins 
of the State Bureau of Statistics of Labor, now the Bureau of 
Statistics. The figures are " average prices " for selected com- 
modities. In 1907 the Bureau discontinued the collection and 
publication of these figures, as the method of gathering and 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 63 

presenting the statistics was regarded by the director as un- 
satisfactory. While it is true that the averages given in the 
earlier reports are only approximations of actual retail prices, 
yet these figures, taken for a period of years, do show in a 
rough way the general movement of retail prices. It seemed 
advisable, therefore, in order to determine the extent of the 
advance of prices since 1907, to obtain average retail prices 
for 1910, thus supplementing the records of the Bureau and 
extending the comparative statistics to date. This was done 
through agents of the commission, who obtained quotations of 
retail prices for selected commodities in seven cities and two 
towns. In each city or town at least three retail shops, pat- 
ronized by wage-earners, were visited, and prices were obtained 
for the commodities listed. Price figures were obtained for 
various grades of commodities of which different qualities were 
sold ; the prices were then averaged for each city or town, and 
the local averages were further combined for the State. The 
following table shows the general results of this inquiry : — 



64 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



OS 



Percentage 

Increase 

or Decrease, 

1897-1910. 


OOf 


C©t*~h-*0 


CO CO •<*! CO •># CM 


f hOOO 


OS 

0' 

CO 


1>- Si CM 

0O t>- O 


COrtlCON 
CM t>- CM TJH CO 


TtOOCOOCOO 
~H CM 1 CO CO 


O^OOCO 


Increase 

or Decrease, 

1897-1910. 


■* OS IO 
K3N 00 
OOO 


OSOON-H 


t-» CO <M CO 00 •* 

O O CO 00 


(NCOOMO 
OOOOO 




O 
6© 




1 r 







005N 
Or^tr^ 
<M i-H ^H 


Si O ■<* US t>- 

iC cm 02 10 r^ 

■*«NMO 


OOO-* CO 00 


i-~ t-h or~ O 

CNlfllNMN 
T-\ 1-1 « 1-1 O 




Si 
CO 

CM 


u 


r^ 


!>• 






CO lO CM 




O CM ■*! Si 

•*ONN 
CO <-i CO CO 




1 1 1 1 1 


1 




-tfflN 
CO CO-— < 

O 


CO Tf 00 r* 

CCCJCRO 
NONN 

US 


f H 
. 1 S - 1 , ^ 


! 1 1 1 1 


• 


10 

e 

« 


CO ■* 10 
3 ^ ' 


■*OfOM 

lO to 

CO rt CO CM 


■* CM 
US CO 
00 

CO 


1 1 1 1 1 


' 




NMCS 
O CO O 

O 


Of OU3 
N0C5O 
CO i-< CM CM 


t» O 
US i-l 

1 , °. . I ^ 


1 1 1 1 1 


1 


i 


lOON 
t^.-<*i CM 


OOUJNN 

©o-hoo 

»-iNCOO 


CM CM CM O CO CO 

O O O US i-H O 


OOOO USO 

CO CO O CO 


US 

Si 


u 


•"* 


,H CD 




1 


(SON 

1-* ,-H O 


OOlflMiO 
O N M ■* O 
MOCMNO 


00 CO 00 f CO 

^tioto-io 
ooo-#oo 


10 oc us 

XOOhkj 
00-*—iO 


US 
CM 


O 


"5 


TH® 




00 


O O CM 

r~ co co 


ONlOOO 
t--CO CM •«*< O 

UJ-HMWO 


HOOO00 00 
Si >-< 00 US CO 
OrtrtiflNOO 


0000 00 00 
OCOOtON 


00 
00 

CO 





C30 


HN 




g 


10 

0= CM -H 


O"900)0 

lo a c 00 

t^ O CO CO O 


<r<i us O 

OCNC-.C-liO 

1-HHOOM 


OiOUJOOO 

•<*< Si t- Ttl -H 
rtTHNCMrH 




OS 

eo 


O 


CM 


-HO 




O 


OOO 


OOU5NN 
f»00'* 
-h O CM CM O 


NOW t^OO 
OOCSO'tOO 

oo-imio'* 


OMONrt 



us 
I>. 

CM 




6© 


t>» 







CO 

1 

m 


s a 3 

OOO 

a aa 


" 03 ° § £ 
03 3 O O 3 

j2 cr-3 a cr 


a c 3 cj 

3 3 3 3 co d 
O O O O 3 

a a a a,o 4s 


-3 r -c r '3'3l3 

c3 c5 c3 c3 c3 

>> >J >> >, >> 


"S 

a 


03 
H 
J 

O 

1 
<1 










>> 

> 

03 
1 3 

.. 03 





5 
























T3 
S.3 . . . 

sJ 

1 0O " 0O ~ a 

Wis 

M03 03 -^>^ e 

O 03 +^ .3 

fl j3.3 0-~ u 






1 
■So -"S 

5.3.^-> CO . 

co co -u jSi-> 

§ £"3 & S * " • " 

o'S'fi 3 03 hD-g = 
03 O O -- 03 fc£ - • - 


• • CD^ • • 

j| M 

3* o*3 § 

• ,• t. C >- O O 

a 000 












00 ^ 



"2 O 

3 ^ 






= 


= 


til 




63 


'" 


03 






—• 


H 





1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 65 

In drawing conclusions from this table, several considera- 
tions should be borne in mind. In the first place, the figures 
here given are averages obtained in the manner described, and 
not actual selling prices. Furthermore, it was not possible in 
all cases to base the figures upon exactly the same standard 
or quality of the commodity, and there are some variations on 
this score. Moreover, the averages are not full yearly averages 
obtained from weekly or monthly quotations extended through- 
out the twelve months, but only partial averages obtained on 
a single visit. Finally, the time of taking the figures was not 
the same in the case of the 1910 returns as in the earlier 
reports. The Labor Bureau figures were obtained in October; 
those secured by agents of the commission were gathered in 
March. The latter figures were thus obtained at the end of 
the recent sharp advance of prices. 

According to these returns, pork leads in the upward move- 
ment, with an advance of 92.4 per cent, for salt pork and 79 
per cent, for fresh pork. Cotton goods also show strong ad- 
vances. Dairy products and beef follow next in order, the 
latter with a rise of 37 per cent. Tea and potatoes are the 
only commodities that have fallen in price. Granulated sugar 
has remained practically unchanged. 

In connection with the advance of prices shown by these 
figures, the fact should also be taken into consideration that 
through substitution of goods there has also taken place a con- 
siderable deterioration of quality in the case of some products. 
That is to say, purchasers now pay a higher price for a poorer 
quality than that which they obtained ten years ago. Merchan- 
dise managers and store buyers and proprietors have admitted 
that this is the fact. As wholesale prices have advanced, store- 
keepers, finding it impossible to supply the quality furnished 
at a given price, have substituted an inferior grade. The 
consumer, as a rule, remembers the price, but is not familiar 
with the quality of the commodity that he buys. This is de- 
clared to be true especially of such commodities as cotton and 
woolen goods. For instance, cotton cloth that seven or eight 
years ago cost the retail merchant 6% cents, and was then sold 
at 10 and 12 cents a yard, now costs him 10 or 11 cents. This 
makes it impossible to sell the same goods at the old price. 



66 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Apparently, however, the retailers are still doing this, while as 
a matter of fact they are giving the customers an inferior 
quality. Cheesecloth has been sold for many years for the 
standard price of 5 cents a yard. Seven or eight years ago a 
quality was used which cost the retailer 3 cents a yard, minus 
the trade discount; the same quality now costs him 4 and 4% 
cents a yard net. Cheesecloth is still sold at 5 cents a yard, 
but the quality is inferior to the grade that could be obtained 
for that price seven or eight years ago. Boots and shoes have 
advanced very little in price, but cheaper grades have been sub- 
stituted at the different prices, so that the retail cost has 
actually advanced in this way about 50 cents a pair. In hosiery 
and woolen clothing similar substitutions have been made. 

The following table gives detailed averages for the various 
cities and towns covered by the special price investigation : — 



1910.] 



HOUSE— No. 1750. 



67 



85 



lo «-o ~ -^ -^ r~ 



co oi re r~- 

o n •<*• i— 
r-j 






CMC- O 



.-. -. 



-jCOCCSOO 



CCMOO 



OOQNOIC 

i~ — e — o --c 



OOMO 

i »h c; — <m i« 



CI O O C C : 



lffC.00 




O CM O i-< 1 « o 


c mo 


no tf5 r— co 

O O CM CO 


O O O O O CO 

e io to w o >o 
o <r-J o — ; — © 


oo co O 
co ■*> t— 
-*• CO t~- 


KJO-tO 
OCSWM 
O O — "-< 


lOOOCCOO 
LO lO -> K(N — 
©CM — — — — ' 


O JO o 

c-i ir. ao 


o o co o 
o»oeo^j< 

CD l-l — — 


c o efl >-o eo bo 

ON ©*- oo 


omo 

Sc~ §o 


ooom 


MW0I903 
OtN ~© — »H 


OfflX 




OllOONOlS 

t- cm oo co — r- 

OMO'-'-O 


cooo 

CO O t- 


oooo 
c o — m 


CO o ooo OO 
co uo oo lo co r- 

ONO-OO 


co >o IO 

'i-SiOO 


O ici ICJ i-S 


IOIOOOIOO 

NNCKMO 


s ** SI 


ills 

s 3 s r 


e3ci33S3 
3 3 O O O O 

ccaafto, 









• >. 



m ' o a a -3 a ' - M ' 

yi nil iiiy 

S 1 

a a 



l "3 «> 
I Jg.g 

3 



1 - a -S | 

^ssa loss's 

I IB 

fa 03 



J'SSJ'S 



;OOU 



68 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



NMN CO 



ooooo 



*-l CO00-H 

c© iouocm 



10*0 CO i 

. us t>- oo f~ < 



CM CO CM CO 



OOOOO O O 

lOtOWXOO CO OS 

ooooo <m cm 



oeusm 



Oi 



8S< 



COOOOOc 



coooo 
CO o oo 

CM CO CM 



ooo 

OCMCO 



rt(NC<5N 



CO lO CO 
CON-* 
CO CO CM 



ic t-- r— 

OOO 



00 CO CO 
CM CO CO 



lOOOiO 



O «5 CO 

OS —< CO 
NCCN 



—i CO t-- 



OOOOO 



lOOO© 
r- m «5 U5 



CM COCO T* CO ' 



00( 
"*CO( 



CSOrt 
CM CO CO 



^ 



ioooo 

— I O O lO 
CM CM IO CM 



E 



§23 

CM CO CM 



OOOOO 



o»co 

OCM O 
CM CO CO 



i-OO iC o 



lONN 



CO COO CO 
NOOH 
CNI CM Ttl CO 



OCOO 
lO CO 00 
CM CO CM 



10K50 OO 



CO COCM ■<*< ' 



CO COOCO i-< ! 



CO O iCO o < 

CO "0 t- O *- i • 

CM CM -* CO 



i CO CM CO 



CHOmN 

IC CO CO CO CO 

ooooo 



oouo 

CM CO CO 



COCOiflfN 
— ' CM CM *-l 
OiOiOKS 



ococo 

lO t~- CM 

0"-il^ 



i M 



51 



CONON 
CM CM «5 CM 



0"!0 
OMN 
CO CO CM 



lO O O UO O 



t--lO U0 

CO-H-H 

CM CO CO 



OOOOO 



d d"£ d 

O O 3 O 

a a o* a 



"C 73 ""d TJ'O 

d fl d d a 

3 3 3 3 3 
OOOOO 

aaaaa 



■CCB 

c d d 

3 3 3 
ooo 
a a a 



73 73 Ti 73 

d d d d 

3 3 3 3 

o o c o 
a a a a 



S3 
,aj2 



2^ 
« o 



J,ww 

CO 



6«2 



J .73 



hi; 

bo 



5 -^ 

5 1 



Pq3 O « 

; ;• C O >- 3 O 



.. S > § 

6 



M . r 

d _a dT3 
o o © © 

J.OWOS 






1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



69 



OS •* © — 
OO t~00 00 



Os 32 

O ro 



r~ — © o © r~ © © 



in m oo m a oo 

t~ U5 O M (M lO 



NWN-h 

t>^ t^r- oo 



00 o 

CO 3 
OS© 

*•+ co 



BBSS 

ta lis *a lis 



CO — — I r- O 



:s S 



iiS©iiS© 
00 t^ 00 CM 
t- t~ t^00 



CO o 
— r— 

co oo 

CM SO 



MM<50 ITS m — 

o i-^ s; o c: cm so 

^h n CM c<S »-i t^ O 






oo o o 
o o o o 

O O WO 

00 00 t^ 00 



t~ ITS liS CO CO SC 



issniQ 



liS lO — t^ 

CO 00 00 t^ 



NlOUSMNI 



o o 
« o 

CM liS 

CM CO 



imoon: 



■ o o i-o lis 

) 3> OS Tf t— 

. liS liS -»f CO 



liS liS 00 

-*> lis rt< 


SS3 

(N co 


oooooo 


CM so 



oo oo© 

cs o ffic-.o 

mo CM CM liS 



o o oo 



i— sot- t-» 



liS— « 

cm r^ 

^H O 



l-SLSOMMaNO 



o o o o 
o o o o 

liS lis liS liS 



o 00 
>iS 00 
CM 00 

CM CO 



o o o i-o o 

CO liS OS CM b- 



S8 

CM liS 



hh^hhhbh fa fa fa fa fa fa 

C3rtc5c3c3c3c3cs rt - c3 c3 cj « 

>>>>>-. >>>>>>>>>> >S >, >. >>>>>> 



■lill 

._; ■*> ►=< £. so 

O 

O 



g.2 



o fa 



|| || 

..... --3 * 

_S bD U 00 ho . -33 

,o ■ - -^2 • - • - | — ' a r m 

Sj:^-- ..5s o t. 

o 
O 



-S £° » S jj 
o - n ca c - u 



70 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



The comparative prices for the State, October, 1904, to 
March, 1910, are exhibited in the following table ; on account 
of changes in classification this comparison could not be carried 
back of 1904: — 



Average Prices paid by Consumers, for the State. 



Articles. 


Basis. 


October, 
1904. 


October, 
1905. 


October, 
1906. 


October, 
1907. 


March, 
1910. 


Beef (roasting): — 














Rib, 


pound, 


$0,152 


$0,138 


$0,158 


$0,162 


$0,184 


Rib roll, 






pound, 


.120 


.128 


.149 


.155 


.165 


Rump (back), 






pound, 


.185 


.179 


.173 


.176 


.275 


Rump (face), 






pound, 


.199 


.165 


.167 


.175 


.190 


Shoulder, 






pound, 


.103 


.110 


.108 


.115 


.146 


Sirloin, . 






pound, 


.227 


.200 


.232 


.220 


.256 


Vein, 






pound, 


.152 


.152 


.160 


.176 


.197 


Pork: — 














Chop, 


pound, 


.156 


.157 


.165 


.182 


.203 


Roast, 


pound, 


.146 


.146 


.148 


.165 


.192 


Spare rib, 


pound, 


.098 


.099 


.095 


.105 


.143 


Salt 


pound, 


.109 


.105 


.117 


.124 


.177 


Ham: — 














Whole 


pound, 


.149 


.132 


.179 


.156 


.205 


Sliced 


pound, 


.231 


.216 


.251 


.247 


.285 


Flour: — 














Bread 


bag, 


.975 


.798 


.740 


.934 


.956 


Bread, 


barrel, 


7.626 


6.354 


5.783 


7.340 


7.459 


Pastry, 


bag, 


.853 


.702 


.620 


.805 


.818 


Beans: — 














Medium, .... 


quart, 


.092 


.088 


.080 


.092 


.098 


Pea, 


quart, 


.092 


.091 


.082 


.097 


.111 


Red kidney, .... 


quart, 


.118 


.121 


.120 


.119 


.128 


Yellow-eye 


quart, 


.113 


.110 


.096 


.101 


.143 


Fish: — 














Clams (in shell), . 


quart, 


- 


- 


.071 


.063 


.064 


Clams (shucked), 






quart, 


- 


- 


.255 


.273 


.269 


Cod (fresh), . 






pound, 


.084 


.088 


.088 


.092 


.086 


Cod (salt), . 






pound, 


.108 


.124 


.122 


.114 


.127 


Finnan haddie, 






pound, 


.103 


.094 


.102 


.119 


.107 


Haddock, 






pound, 


- 


- 


.072 


.082 


.079 


Halibut (fresh), 






pound, 


.193 


.202 


.177 


.214 


.205 


Halibut (smoked), 






pound, 


.198 


.204 


. .207 


.246 


.238 


Mackerel (salt), 






apiece, 


.153 


.169 


.191 


.161 


.190 


Oysters, . 






quart, 


- 


- 


.404 


.429 


.423 


Salmon (smoked), 




pound, 


.255 


.270 


.251 


.275 


.277 


Eggs: — 














Eastern, .... 


dozen, 


.270 


.295 


.291 


.298 


.289 


Near-by, .... 


dozen, 


.345 


.357 


.348 


.413 


.329 


Western, .... 


dozen, 


.256 


.259 


.257 


.261 


.264 


Butter: — 














Creamery, .... 


pound, 


.265 


.263 


.291 


.329 


.355 


Sugar: — 














Cut loaf, . . . . 


pound, 


.073 


.074 


.076 


.077 


.074 


Granulated, .... 


pound, 


.057 


.054 


.054 


.056 


.060 


Powdered, .... 


pound, 


.073 


.074 


.072 


.076 


.078 


Coffee: — 














Blend 


pound, 


.274 


.249 


.273 


.258 


.268 


Java, 


pound, 


.304 


.294 


.302 


.286 


.329 


Mocha-Java, .... 


pound, 


.314 


.293 


.307 


.313 


.317 


Tea: — 














Black 


pound, 


.511 


.513 


.519 


.469 


.453 


Green, 


pound, 


.514 


.453 


.497 


.442 


.458 


Mixed, 


pound, 


.530 


.486 


.477 


.438 


.421 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



71 



Average Prices paid by Consumers, for the State — Con. 



Articles. 


Basis. 


October, 
1904. 


October, 
1905. 


October, 
1906. 


October, 
1907. 


March 
1910. 


Potatoes: — 

Sweet, 

White, 

Coal: — 

Egg 

Furnace, .... 

Xut 

Stove, 


pound, 
peck, 

ton, 
ton, 
ton, 
ton, 


$0,022 
.201 

7.518 
7.609 
7.564 
7.751 


$0,021 
.207 

6.850 
6.546 
6.928 
7.006 


$0,025 
.206 

6.927 
7.045 
7.026 
7.096 


$0,026 
.248 

7.382 
7.071 
7.444 
7.509 


$0,042 
.182 

7.896 
7.741 
7.808 
7.814 



The effect of the advance of retail prices upon the cost of 
living of the average family may be indicated by showing the 
comparative expenditures for the chief items in the budget in 
1901 and 1910. The eighteenth annual report of the United 
States Commissioner of Labor for 1903 gives statistics of fam- 
ily expenditures for the year 1901. The figures in that report 
showing the expenditures for food of 253 workingmen's families 
in Massachusetts, and the corresponding expenditures for 1910, 
calculated according to the percentage of price increase in 
the different classes of commodities, are given in the follow- 
ing table : — 

Average Family Expenditures for Food in Massachusetts, 1901 and 1910. l 



Articles. 



Ex- 
pendi- 
ture 
per 



Ex- 
pendi- 
ture 
per 



Family, | Family 
1901. j 1910. 



Fresh beef, . 

Salt beef, 

Fresh hog product 

Salt hog products, 

Other meat, 

Poultry, 

Fish, 

Eggs, 

Milk, 

Butter, 

Cheese, 

Lard, 

Tea, 



S56.14 
24.75 
21.12 
14.68 
15.92 
12.83 
19.57 
14.37 
29.60 
32.28 

2.71 
11.81 

2.93 



$72.87 
30.74 
30.46 
20.29 
18.63 
19.90 
30.51 
19.66 
37.15 
45.74 
2.46 
19.84 
2.75 



Articles. 



Coffee 

Sugar 

Molasses 

Flour and meal, . 

Bread, 

Rice, 

Potatoes 

Other vegetables, . 

Fruit, 

Vinegar, pickles, condiments, 

Other food 

Total, . . . . 



Ex- 
pendi- 
ture 
per 
Family, 
1901. 



$4.52 

20.32 
2.53 

24.73 
8.14 
1.93 

11.22 
9.50 
9.81 
4.18 

14.61 



S3 70. 20 



Ex- 
pendi- 
ture 
per 
Family, 
1910. 



$5.45 

23.98 
2.36 

36.35 
8.14 
1.52 
7.60 
9.50 
9.81 
4.60 

17.79 



$478.10 



Report of the United States Commissioner of Labor, 1903, p. 496. 



72 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



The same report gives the expenditures for rent, clothing and 
other items, in addition to food. The classified expenditures 
for a family having an income of $600 to $700 in 1901 and 
the corresponding amounts according to the higher price level of 
1910 are shown in the following table: — 

Average Family Expenditures for Various Purposes in Normal Families 
having an Income of $600 to $700 in 1901? 





Objects of Expenditure. 


Expendi- 
ture in 
1901. 


Per Cent, 
of Total 
Expendi- 
tures. 


Expendi- 
ture in 
1910. 


Per Cent. 

Increase, 
1901-10. 


Rent, 
Fuel, . 
Lighting, . 
Clothing, . 
Sundries, . 
Food, 










$113.03 

28.45 

6.82 

78.76 

118.59 

265.93 


18.48 
4.65 
1.12 
12.88 
19.39 
43.48 


$126.59 

32.72 

7.50 

94.31 

130.45 

345.71 


12 
15 
10 
20 
10 
30 


Total, . 


$611.58 


100.00 


$737.28 


- 



Report of the United States Commissioner of Labor, 1903, p. 97. 



On this basis the total increase of the cost of living in nine 
years for a family of the size in question has been 20.5 per 
cent., or, roundly, one-fifth. 



1910.1 HOUSE— No. 1750. 



III. 

WAGES AXD HOUKS OF LABOR. 



The absolute cost of living as shown by the prices of neces- 
sary commodities, and the amount of family expenditures is 
of less significance for the purpose of this investigation than 
the relative cost of living, as indicated by the ratio of prices 
and expenditures to incomes. Obviously, an advance of retail 
prices and family expenditures, if accompanied by a propor- 
tionate increase of wages, involves no economic hardship. An 
upward movement of prices is of real significance in its bear- 
ing upon the cost of living only in connection with the contem- 
porary movement of wages. If the latter does not keep pace 
with the former, the relative cost of living increases. In con- 
nection with price statistics, therefore, wage statistics must also 
be considered in estimating the influence of a change in the 
price level upon the well-being of the working population. 

For the United States the relation of retail prices to wages 
from 1890 to 1907 is exhibited by index numbers computed by 
the Department of Labor. The changes of wages and hours 
in connection with the movement of retail prices are shown by 
the following table, which gives the percentage of increase or 
decrease in 1907, as compared with previous years, in employees, 
hours per week, wages per hour, full-time weekly earnings per 
employee, retail prices of food and purchasing power of earn- 
ings : — 



74 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Comparative Changes in Employees, Wages, Hours and Prices, 1890- 

1907} 

[Per cent, of increase (+) or decrease ( — ) in 1907, as compared with previous years.] 













Retail 

Prices of 

Food 


Purchasing Power 










Full-time 


measured by 
Retail Prices of 




Em- 
ployees. 


Hours 

per 
Week. 


Wages 

per 
Hour. 


Weekly 
Earnings 
per Em- 


weighted 

according 

to 






YEAR. 




Full-time 
Weekly 
Earnings 
per Em- 
ployee. 










ployee. 


Family 
Con- 
sumption. 


Hourly 

Wages. 


Average, 1890-99, 


+44.4 


—5.0 


+28.8 


+22.4 


+20.6 


+ 6.8 


+1.5 


1890, . 


+52.3 


—5.7 


+28.4 


+21.2 


+17.8 


+ 9.1 


+2.9 


1891 








+48.4 


—5.5 


+28.4 


+21.4 


+16.2 


+10.6 


+4.5 


1892 








+45.6 


—5.5 


+27.8 


+20.8 


+18.4 


+ 8.0 


+2.1 


1893 








+45.3 


—5.3 


+27.7 


+20.9 


+15.5 


+10.6 


+4.7 


1894 








+53.5 


-4.8 


+31.6 


+25.3 


+21.0 


+ 8.8 


+3.6 


1895 








+49.8 


—5.1 


+31.0 


+24.4 


+23.3 


+ 6.3 


+ .9 


1896 








+46.5 


-4.8 


+29.2 


+23.0 


+26.3 


+ 2.3 


—2.6 


1897 








+43.1 


-4.6 


+29.3 


+23.4 


+25.2 


+ 3.3 


—1,5 


1898 








+35.7 


—4.7 


+28.5 


+22.5 


+22.2 


+ 5.2 


+ .3 


1899 








+28.8 


—4.2 


+26.3 


+20.9 


+21.2 


+ 4.2 


— .2 


1900 








+24.9 


—3.7 


+22.1 


+17.6 


+19.3 


+ 2.3 


—1.5 


1901 








+21.2 


—3.2 


+19.3 


+15.6 


+14.6 


+ 4.0 


+ .8 


1902 








+16.8 


—2.4 


+14.8 


+12.1 


+ 8.7 


+ 5.5- 


+3.0 


1903 








+14.2 


—1.7 


+10.7 


+ 9.0 


+ 9.3 


+ 1.3 


— .3 


1904 








+14.9 


— .9 


+10.1 


+ 9.1 


+ 8.0 


+ 2.0 


+1.1 


1905 








+ 8.1 


— .9 


+ 8.3 


+ 7.4 


+ 7.3 


+ .9 


+ .1 


1906 








+ 1.0 


— .4 


+ 3.7 


+ 3.3 


+ 4.2 


— .5 


— .9 



Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor, 



p. 4. 



The index numbers of employees, wages, hours, prices and 
purchasing power are given in the following table : — 



Index Numbers of Employees, Wages, Hours, Prices. 













Retail 

Prices of 

Food 


Purchasing Power 










Full-time 


measured by 

Retail Prices of 

Food of — 




Em- 
ployees. 


Hours 


Wages 


Weekly 


weighted 


YEAR. 


per 
Week. 


per 
Hour. 


Earnings 
per Em- 


according 
to 




Full-time 
Weekly 
Earnings 
per Em- 
ployee. 










ployee. 


Family 
Con- 
sumption. 


Hourly 
Wages. 


1890, . 


94.8 


100.7 


100.3 


101.0 


102.4 


97.9 


98.6 


1891 








97.3 


100.5 


100.3 


100.8 


103.8 


96.6 


97.1 


1892 








99.2 


100.5 


100.8 


101.3 


101.9 


98.9 


99.4 


1893 








99.4 


100.3 


100.9 


101.2 


104.4 


96.6 


96.9 


1894 








94.1 


99.8 


97.9 


97.7 


99.7 


98.2 


98.0 


1895 








96.4 


100.1 


98.3 


98.4 


97.8 


100.5 


100.6 


1896 








98.6 


99.8 


99.7 


99.5 


95.5 


104.4 


104.2 


1897 








100.9 


99.6 


99.6 


99.2 


96.3 


103.4 


103.0 


1898 








106.4 


99.7 


100.2 


99.9 


98.7 


101.5 


101.2 


1899 








112.1 


99.2 


102.0 


101.2 


99.5 


102.5 


101.7 


1900 








115.6 


98.7 


105.5 


104.1 


101.1 


104.4 


103.0 


1901 








119.1 


98.1 


108.0 


105.9 


105.2 


102.7 


100.7 


1902 








123.6 


97.3 


112.2 


109.2 


110.9 


101.2 


98.5 


1903 








126.5 


96.6 


116.3 


112.3 


110.3 


105.4 


101.8 


1904 








125.7 


95.9 


117.0 


112.2 


111.7 


104.7 


100.4 


1905 








133.6 


95.9 


118.9 


114.0 


112.4 


105.8 


101.4 


1906 








142.9 


95.4 


124.2 


118.5 


115.7 


107.3 


102.4 


1907 








144.4 


95.0 


128.8 


122.4 


120.6 


106.8 


101.5 



Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor, July, 1908, p. 7. 







^^^^^^^^S}^^^ rjtj^^i^^SSSSSci^^ 




























































\ 


\ 
















\ 


\ 




l > 


s s 


\ 




















1 
1 

I 








— S 


S 


























\ 
































•s 


v 


**% 






















\ 














1 1 




















* 


V, 












K 






\ 














I 
1 


























*N 












\ 






\ 












I 


















<o 






) 














\ 












1 






3 














UJ 




1 










\ 






\ 












1 

i 




















uiUa] 

b s 




\ 


V 


s 












i 












1 

1 
























\ 


\ 


s 










\ 


s x 


V 




/ 


1 




























4- 












V, 


V 




/ 








o 














S 5 














\ 










\ 




\ 


i 








S 








































\ 


\ 


i 
































\ 










\ 




* i 








































\ 








v 


k, 


< 








So 






























s 


'+> 


\ 






v ; \ 






































% 


s 




i 
1 
1 












































1\ 




1 




25 
25 












<c 




























; ^ 




1 












































;\ 


\ 


) 










































i 


/ - 


h 




1 

ED 












2 ■*■ 




























V 




\ 






































y 


</ 


f' 


s 
















cc 5 1) 




























/ t 








































1 




X 








2? 












§ Uj Vj 

a u. y 


























\ 






















O (^ a. 
^ <0 & - 

■u ft: £S « 


























/ 


k 

> 


\ 






95 










1 S O ^ ^» 


























» 




V- 






1 










! a 5 ^ «t 


























V! 






\ 








1 


Inn 






























1 




£ -J"> 


£ * ^ 2 »; ^ * n o « id «*■ ^ i «^y-<No COv o5N05o «c^- 


s * 


2; **•«*• * ^tontn^^NM NNSiJ^^ooOoofi a. <n 


£ w 





5: 
o 

q£ . 

5 § y 

u. £ - 

V) *- ^ 

Sill 

> -. »^ 

C 5 *o 
t *: "o 

ki ^ 2- 
oc ^ 5 



2 

UJ O 

<0 uj 
3: 2: 



K U. 



Uf Uj uj 

tt ftr te 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 75 

The foregoing statistics are graphically reproduced by curves 
on the accompanying chart. 

It appears that in 1907 wages per hour were 28.8 per cent, 
higher than the average for the ten years 1890 to 1899; full- 
time weekly earnings for employees were 22.4 per cent, higher ; 
retail prices were 20.6 per cent, higher; hours per week were 
5 per cent, lower; the purchasing power of hourly wages was 
6.8 per cent, higher, and that of full-time weekly earnings 
was 1.5 per cent, higher. The figures for purchasing power for 
1907 show a slight decline, as compared with 1906. In other 
words, the advance of wages down to 1906 was slightly greater 
than the rise of prices, measured from the average of the ten 
years 1890 to 1899, while in 1907 this small gain in purchasing 
power of wages was somewhat reduced. There are no published 
statistics showing the comparative movement of wages and prices 
from 1907 to 1910. The question whether the upward move- 
ment of prices during the last two years has been accompanied 
by a proportionate advance of wages cannot be answered by 
official figures. The common opinion is that prices have out- 
stripped wages in this recent advance. 

The existing wage statistics for Massachusetts are unsatis- 
factory, and inadequate for purposes of comparison over any 
considerable period. The available data for such a comparison 
include: (1) figures of average weekly earnings for certain 
years, 1860-97, published in reports of the Bureau of Statistics 
of Labor; (2) figures of average yearly earnings for each year, 
1886-1908, given in reports of the Statistics of Manufactures, 
computed by dividing the total amount paid for wages in es- 
tablishments reporting by the average number of persons em- 
ployed during the year; (3) changes in weekly rates of wages 
presented in recent reports .of the Bureau of Statistics, 1907-09 ; 
(4) returns of prevailing weekly rates of wages, on file in the 
office of the Bureau of Statistics, made by trade unions for 1908 
and 1909. 

These statistics are brought together for selected leading oc- 
cupations in the tables that follow : — 



76 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Table 1. — Average Weekly Wages, 1860-97. ' 



Industries and Occupations. 


1860. 


1872. 


1878. 


1881. 


1897. 


Boots and shoes: — 

Cutters, 


§12.00 


$14.81 


$11.05 


$14.91 


$11.63 


Building trades: — 

Carpenters, 


9.92 


14.66 


11.33 


12.64 


15.22 


Cabinet making: — 

Cabinet makers, 


10.56 


14.66 


11.03 


12.00 


13.54 


Carpetings: — 

Wool sorters, 


6.50 


_ 


9.25 


11.76 


11.33 


Carriages: — 

Wheelwrights, 


10.64 


17.77 


13.70 


13.42 


15.58 


Clothing (ready-made) : — 

Cutters, 


13.92 


19.85 


16.00 


19.81 


20.35 


Cotton goods: — 

Mule-spinners 

Ring-spinners (overseers), . 
Ring-spinners (second hands), . 
Weavers (overseers), .... 
Weavers (second hands), 


6.33 
11.52 

7.50 
17.41 

7.00 


10.70 


7.41 
18.00 

9.00 
20.00 

9.00 


10.09 
13.80 
10.51 
16.39 
10.91 


13.24 
21.75 
9.90 
24.23 
12.63 


Leather: — 

Tanners 


6.83 


10.41 


8.00 


8.74 


9.00 


Machines and machinery: — 

Pattern-makers 

Machinists, 

Paper: — 

Paper-machine tenders, 


9.64 
10.00 


17.60 
14.40 

16.00 


15.24 
13.05 

15.25 


18.10 
17.09 

15.50 


13.72 
11.05 

17.69 


Printing: — 

Job compositors, 

Compositors, daily, .... 


10.19 

14.83 


25.77 


14.12 

18.28 


16.00 
20.00 


15.50 
21.78 


Stone: — 

Quarrymen, 


5.70 


- 


6.80 


8.00 


9.15 


Woolen goods: — 

Wool sorters, 

Weavers, 


6.98 
5.50 


9.50 


8.50 
7.00 


9.43 
8.33 


12.28 
8.64 



1 From the twenty-eighth annual report of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor, 
pp. 1-12. 



Comparing average weekly wages in 1897 with rates in 1860, 
as shown in Table 1, we find a marked increase in all groups ex- 
cept " cutters ; " the wages of this class of workers were about 
the same in 1897 as in 1860. In the case of other occupations 
the increases averaged roughly 50 per cent. 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



77 



Ifl CO (M t>J 



OS -<*< 



O <M CM 00 



** «* m 



<M CO 

CO lO 

CO 00 



I s 

8 



SO 



^5 co »o >o »o 



<M CM lO CO 



110 »o CO CO 



CO 


•<*< 


*- 


t- 


£ 


OS 


6N 


^H 




CM 


55 


oo 


^H 


-* 


»o 


CO 


•**< 






_, 








































<M 






CN 


eq 




EN 


r^ 






rr 


UB 




CO 


•^1 


CO 


1C 


i--D 


IQ 


" 


tH 


»o 


U5 


CO 


CO 


o 


«© 


CO 




■«* 




^ 






CM 




co 


CO 


e-1 








00 


09 


CN 


■*. 


qo 


— ■ 


03 


CO 




00 






OS 


00 


co 



00 CO -*< O 
CO CO lO >o 



CO -H — I CO 



I = 



■^ O *-H 



<M CNI CO <M 



5 8, -S ^ S a 

8 3 c3 .2 o 3 
05 O O O O fe 



>» C 2 * S 

.2 -5 -o "3 o 

CD rt O -S o 

O § cS 0) 

B 3 S £ 



a -° ® 

a -° 9 
^ ti tc 



£ £ £ 



78 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 








OS 


^ 




o 


-# 


o 


ci 


OS 


















9 










CO 


lO 


00 


■<*< 








CO 




00 


^r 


CO 


pq 


DO 


co 


co 


OS 


1 


OS 


t- 




























CO 


CO 


OS 


O0 








C3 












«© 


























ITS 


"* 






O 


os 


-* 


co 


pq 


■* 


CO 


pq 


cm 


OS 




o 


cq 


CO 






s 












co 




oo 


«H 


co 


pq 


>-l 




■^ 


OS 




-# 


t~ 


00 


,_, 


pq 




,_ 








!-, 






T _ ( 






s 




US 


o 






pq 


CO 


Cq 






OS 


r- 












u 












co 


US 




lO 


^ 




o 


lO 








us 


00 


X* 


o 




O 








eo 


eo 


O 




c-q 






to 




o 


LO 


lO 


LO 


co 


CM 






CO 


CO 


pq 


o 


CO 






00 


o 


OS 


o 


CO 


o 




OS 


cxi 


o 




-^ 






t^. 








































us 


M< 




*. 


CO 


LO 


CO 


<* 


LO 


us 


T}< 




eo 


US 








^* 


oo 


CM 


o 


o 


r^ 






LO 




o 






r^ 


1^ 


o 


s 




LO 


















^^ 






OS 


eo 


r^ 


o 








_ 
























o 




CM 


OS 


os 


CO 


OS 




OJ 






t» 


f^ 














lO 


CO 






CO 


T* 


W 


US 




>* 


CO 


»*( 








eo 






t- 
























§ 


s 


00 




« 


CM 


OS 


JC~ 


CO 




eo 


CO 


CO 


OJ 


OS 


CO 


eo 






OS 


■<*! 


cr 


,_l 




■* 






















pq 




as 


CO 








CO 






t^ 






pq 




rt 


e© 


>* 




CO 


CO 




CO 




us 


lO 






>o 


us 




CO 














pq 






© 








o 








CO 

o 


^ 




pq 




CO 


pq 


t^ 


t^ 


l> 


CO 


CO 


lr^ 


pq 


Tt< 


O 


US 


-jH 




CM 


_l 




_ 


r> 




























00 


OS 








t>. 


US 


CO 




OS 


CO 


CM 








«# 




CO 


CO 


lO 


CO 




IQ 




TJH 




us 


x* 


^ 


CO 






t^ 






oq 








© 




l>. 


O 










1 


■<*< 




CM 




CM 






CM 


CM 


to 


lO 


CM 




-* 


O 


r~ 


H 


o 




_H 




CO 


o 




t^ 
















OS 




co 










CO 




"-O 


US 


lO 


■* 








os 




9» 


«# 




CO 


CO 


T|H 


co 


"* 
















CO 




CO 






r^ 








o 


pq 


OS 


o 


cq 




Co 






• 


00 




CO 


OS 


t> 


co 


us 


CO 


US 


** 






US 




os 


00 


g 


(N 


~ v 


§ 


_ 




OS 


pq 




_ 








CM 


s 


pq 




oo 


os 




eo 




pq 




LO 


«a 


^f< 


^*> 


CO 




oo 


" 


at 


co 




CO 


CO 




CO 










-* 






^H 


CO 








t^ 




r^ 






cm 


CO 


CO 


^ 


eo 


"* 






CO 


e 




CO 


CO 


cm 


•- 1 




CM 


y ~* 


1-1 




CO 












CO 




o 


cm 


_ 


© 


t^ 


e-q 




^ 














































^ 


3 


c^> 


CO 


CO 


co 


lO 


CO 


>* 


LO 


US 


* 




o 


■>* 


■* 


CO 




3 
















^_ 
















os 


© 


^p 


US 


CO 


o 


CO 


<* 


cm 


CO 




o 


O 


CM 


CO 






"O 






,_, 




— 




■* 




,_l 


t^ 






■* 


pq 
























CO 


e>q 




t^ 


t<- 


CO 




SK 


CO 


US 


CO 


CO 


-* 


CO 


<* 


lO 


*o 


■* 






T(l 


CO 


CO 
































o 






e© 


CO 


-* 


co 


o 


oc 


oo 


CM 


CO 


r^ 


CO 




U3 


U3 


t^ 




OS 
00 














,_| 






s 




















I>. 


cm 


r~ 


o 




co 




<cq 












ee 


CO 


lo 


CO 


CO 




CO 


*# 


















a 




















DO 

o 
o 
bo 














a 






o 

M 

c3 








7? 

c 


'3 




O 

a 


— 



O 
O 










o 

iZ! 


00 

03 

d 

o 
o 

pq 






00 






£ 




1 
S 


o 
bfl 

t. 

o 

a 

03 

a 


s 




00 


-o 


m 

O 




I 

CD 
a 

o 


c3 

00 
03 

If 

c3 

O 


bC 

.2 
o 

5 


I 

a 

o 

e 

O 


s 

'5 

fe- 


a 

c3 
>> 

CD 

8 

K 


S 

1 
h3 


so 

g 

o 
S3 


a 

c3 

3 


-a 

p 

03 
<D 

a 
S3 


c 

c3 


a 
o 



it 

a 

xi 

o 





bO 



"3 



15 


o 

M 

-3 

I 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 79 

The statistics of average yearly earnings given in Table 2 
show an advance from 1886 to 1908 in the case of all industries 
except clothing. For the twelve years 1897-1908 the advance 
was general in all industries; the average increase was about 
20 per cent. This table thus shows that the advance of wages, 
1860-97, indicated by the figures of Table 1, continued to 1908. 
The figures of average weekly earnings and average yearly earn- 
ings are, of course, not strictly comparable, but in a rough way 
the two tables may be combined to indicate the movement of 
wages down to 1908. Looking more closely at the figures of 
average yearly earnings in the last decade, we find that wages 
did not begin to advance appreciably until 1899, whereas prices 
had started on the upward grade in 1897. The advance in 
wages was practically continuous, with the exception of the 
slight recession in 1904, down to 1907 ; then from 1907 to 1908 
there was in some industries another slight decline. 

The fact that wages lagged behind prices in the advance after 
1896 is in harmony with the recognized economic law that 
wages always move more sluggishly than prices. This prin- 
ciple is clearly stated by Prof. F. W. Taussig in commenting 
upon the movement of prices and wages in the inflation period 
of the 60's and the following decades : — 

Money wages responded with unmistakable slowness to the inflating 
influences of the civil war. In 1865, when prices stood at 217, as com- 
pared with 100 in 1860, wages had only touched 143. The course of 
events at this time shows the truth of the common statement that in 
times of inflation wages rise less quickly than prices, and that the period 
of transition is one of hardship to the wages-receiving class. On the 
other hand, the sluggish movement of wages shows itself in the opposite 
way in the succeeding period of falling prices. As wages rise less 
quickly than prices, so they fall less quickly. The upward movement 
of wages continued after 1865, rapidly until about 1867, thereafter more 
slowly. But for the activity of the speculative period preceding the 
crisis of 1873, it is probable that money wages would have begun to fall 
again as early as 1870. As it was, the advance continued slowly, until 
the crash of 1873 precipitated a downward movement, which lasted until 
1879, and corresponds to the abrupt fall of prices during the same years. 
With the resumption of specie payments, and the new and more solid 
start which the industry of the country then took in all directions, a 
striking inverse movement of wages and prices took place. From 1879 
wages rise; there is a slight interruption of the upward movement in 



80 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



the depressed years 1884-86, but otherwise the rise is steady. Prices 
rise in the " boom " years 1880-82, and thereafter fall unmistakably. 
Taking these years as a whole, we have strong testimony of that inverse 
movement of prices on the one hand, and of wages, and indeed all money 
incomes, on the other hand, which seems to have taken place in all 
civilized countries during the last generation. 1 

Table 3. — Net Results, Changes in Rates of Wages in 1907, 1908 and 
1909, by Industries. 2 



INDUSTRIES. 



Building and stone working: — 

Building trades, 

Building and street labor, 

Stone working, . 
Clothing: — 

Boots and shoes, 

Garments, .... 

Hats, caps and furs, . 

Shirts, collars and laundry, 
Food, liquors and tobacco: — 

Food products, . 

Liquors, .... 

Tobacco, .... 
Leather and rubber goods: — 

Leather and leather goods, 

Rubber and gutta-percha goods, 
Metals, machinery and shipbuilding : — 

Iron and steel manufactures, . 

Miscellaneous metal manufactures, 

Shipbuilding, .... 
Printing and allied trades : — 

Printing and publishing, . 

Bookbinding and blankbook making 

Lithographing and engraving, . 
Public employment: — 

Federal employees, . 

State employees, 

Municipal employees, 
Textiles: — 

Bleaching, dyeing and printing, 

Cotton goods, .... 

Flax, hemp and jute goods, 

Hosiery and knit goods, . 

Woolen and worsted goods, 

Other textiles, .... 
Transportation: — 

Railroads, 

Teaming, 

Navigation, . . . . 

Freight handling, 

Telegraphs, .... 
Wooden manufactures : — 

Planing-mill products, 

Cooperage, .... 

Wood-turning and carving, 
Others: — 

Barbering, 

Chemicals, . 

Glass and glassware, 

Paper and paper goods, 

Stationary enginemen, 

Theatres and music, ... 

Water, light and power, . 

All industries, . 



Net Amount of Increase (+) or 

Decrease ( — ) in the Weekly Wages 

of Those affected in — 



1909. 



+$6,365.32 
+287.40 
+955.36 

+1,242.38 
+280.00 

+15.00 

+411.00 

+472.50 



—15.39 

+234.96 
+64.26 



+1,052.26 
+78.60 



+500.22 
+34.01 



+2,402.17 
—202.40 

+48.17 
+161.30 

+1,352.51 



+21.86 
+1,002.13 

+188.62 
+34.00 



+$16,986.24 



1908. 



+$1,582.94 
+150.00 
+706.96 

+1,734.68 
+138.50 



+144.00 
+401.86 
—120.00 



+760.29 
+13.50 
+65.50 
+14.00 

+1,474.36 

+159.12 
+423.51 

—42.16 
-89,972.78 
—1,050.00 
—3,258.19 
—2,427.96 



+270.54 
+623.65 

+21.60 



-167.00 



+1,002.13 
—32.09 

+7.50 
—186.80 



-$89,566.70 



1907. 



+$21,073.17 
+834.60 
+283.56 

+2,420.38 

+134.00 

+104.00 

+11.00 

+118.50 
+338.99 
+488.00 

+100.00 
+166.88 

+2,935.09 
+315.29 
+112.38 

+2,709.70 
+15.00 



+2,310.90 
+1,316.18 

+5,489.54 

+411.14 

+70,615.52 

+399.40 

+1,117.72 

+6,607.19 



+16,620.50 

+1,693.74 

+352.00 

+808.23 

+60.00 

+86.70 

+300.00 

+170.00 
+111.00 

+53.73 

+868.39 

+71.00 

+11.29 



Net 
Amount of 

Increase 
(+) or De- 
crease ( — ) 
in Period 
1907-09. 



+$29,021.43 
+1,272.00 
+1,945.88 

+5,397.44 

+552.50 

+104.00 

+26.00 

+673.50 

+1,213.35 

+368.00 

+100.00 
+151.49 

+3,930.34 
+379.55 
+125.88 

+3,827.46 
+93.60 
+14.00 

+4,285.48 
+1,475.30 
+5,947.06 

+368.98 
—16,955.09 

—853.00 
—2,140.47 
+4,227.40 

+161.30 

+18,243.55 

+2,317.39 

+352.00 

+21.60 

+808.23 

+60.00 

+86.70 

+133.00 

+170.00 
+132.86 

+21.64 

+1,057.01 

+112.50 

—175.51 



+$141,634.71 | +$69,054.25 



1 Article in Yale Review, November, 1893, p. 244. 

2 This table is taken from the manuscript of the report on the Statistics of Labor, 1909, not 
yet published, by courtesy of the Director of the Bureau of Statistics, Mr. C. F. Gettemy. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 81 

It appears that the changes in the three years, 1907-09, have 
resulted in a net rise in wages in each industry except cotton 
goods; flax, hemp and jute goods; hosiery and knit goods; and 
water, light and power. Of the aggregate rise of $69,054.25 a 
week, the building trades accounted for $29,021.43, railroads 
for $18,243.55, municipal employees for $5,947.06; and the 
boot and shoe industry for $5,397.44. 

The changes in 1907 resulted in a net increase in all branches 
of occupations. Altogether, 166,167 employees had their rates 
of wages increased during the year, and of this number 85,731 
employees had their rates of wages increased twice. Decreases 
in rates of wages were reported in only 467 cases. The net 
result of all the changes in the rates of wages was an increase 
of $141,634.71 a week, or an average increase of 85 cents a 
week for each employee affected. There took place also a 
general reduction of hours in 1907. It appears that the work- 
ing week was shortened for 26,244 workers and lengthened for 
298. The total weekly decrease in the number of working hours 
aggregated 106,286.5, while the total increase aggregated 2,525. 
Thus the net effect of all the changes was a reduction of 103,- 
761.5 hours in the weekly working time of the employees 
affected, or an average of 3,9 hours a week for each employee. 

The industrial depression which began in October, 1907, and 
continued during 1908 checked the upward movement of wages. 
So far as could be ascertained by the Bureau of Statistics, the 
total number of wage earners whose rates of wages were changed 
during 1908 was 101,367, as compared with 166,634 in 1907; 
and of this number only 5,947, or 5.87 per cent., had their rates 
of wages increased, as compared with 166,167, or 99.72 per 
cent., in 1907. The net result of all the changes was a decrease 
of $89,566.70, or an average of 88 cents a week, as compared 
with an increase of $141,634.71, or an average of 85 cents a 
week, in 1907. The net increase in 1907 and the net decrease 
in 1908 were due chiefly to changes in the textile industry. 
During 1907 only 467 wage earners received reductions in rates 
of wages, while in 1908 95,420 received reductions. The aver- 
age decrease per employee in 1907 was $1.25 a week, and in 
1908 it was $1.04. 

The reported number of wage earners whose rates of wages 



82 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



were changed during 1909 was 18,380. Of these, 18,113 re- 
ceived increases amounting to $17,503.27 a week, and 375 sus- 
tained decreases amounting to $517.03 a week. The net re- 
sult of all the changes was therefore an increase of $16,986.24 
a week. A much smaller number of wage earners received 
changes in rates of wages in 1909 as compared with 1908 and 
1907. The total number of wage earners whose wages were 
changed during the year was 18,380, as compared with 101,367 
in 1908 and 166,634 in 1907. The net result of all the changes 
in 1909 was an increase of $16,986.24, or an average of 92 cents 
a week, as compared with a decrease in 1908 of $89,566.70, or 
an average of 88 cents a week, and an increase in 1907 of $141,- 
634.71, or an average of 85 cents a week. The net gain in 
wages during the three years 1907-09 was $69,054.25. 



Table 4.— 


- Prevailing Rates of Union Wages. 


Occupations. 


Average Weekly 
Wage, 1908. 


Average Weekly 
Wage, 1909. 


Boots and shoes: — 








Cutters: — 








Boston, .... 




$16.80-21.00 


$16.80-21.00 


Lynn, .... 




15.00-22.80 


Average 19.00 1 


Brockton, 




18.00 


18.00 


Haverhill. 




16.50 


16.50 


Building trades: — 








Carpenters: — 








Dan vers, 




18.00 


18.50-25.68 


Fall River, 


















18.00 


18.00 


Fitchburg, 


















18.00 


18.00 


Framingham ( 


S.), 
















19.68 


19.68 


Gardner, 


















15.00-19,00 


16.80 


Haverhill, 


















18.00 


18.00 


Holyoke, 


















16.50 


16.50 


Lawrence, 


















18.00 


18.00 


Lowell, . 


















16.80 


16.80 


Lynn, 


















19.68 


19.68 


Maiden, . 


















21.00 


21.00 


Maynard, 


















15.00 


16.80 


Melrose, . 


















19.68 


19.68 


Milton, . 


















21.00 


21.00 


Natick, . 


















21.00 


21.00 


New Bedford, 


















18.00 


18.00 


Quincy (791), 


















19.68 


20.16 


Salem, 


















19.68 


19.68 


Somerville, 


















21.00 


21.01 


Springfield, 


















18.00-21.00 


19.50 


Waltham, 


















19.25 


19.25 


Webster, . 


















13.50-16.50 


15.00 


Westfield, 


















19.68 


18.00 


Worcester, 


















19.68 


19.68 


Cotton goods: — 








Mule spinners: — 








Holyoke, 




Average 15.00 : 


Average 15.00 l 


Weavers: — 








Lowell, .... 




6.00-12.00 


6.00-12.00 


Clothing (ready-made): — 








Cutters : — 








Boston 




Average 24 . 50 l 


Average 24.50 l 



1 Piece rates. 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



83 



Table 4. — Prevailing Rates of Union Wages — Concluded. 



Occupations. 



Average Weekly- 
Wage, 1908. 



Average Weekly 
Wage, 1909. 



Cabinet making: — 
Cabinet makers: — 
Boston, . 



Machines and machinery: 
Pattern makers: — 
Boston, . 
Fitchburg, 
Lawrence, 
Lowell, . 
Pittsfield, 
Springfield, 
Worcester, 



Machinists : — 
Athol, . 
Boston, . 
B. &M. R.R., 
N. Y., N. H. & H. 
Greenfield, 
Holyoke, 
Hyde Park, . 
Lawrence, 
Lowell, . 
Lynn, 

New Bedford, 
Pittsfield, 
Springfield, . 
Worcester, 



Paper: — 
Paper machine tenders: 
Lawrence, 
Montague, 



Printing : — 
Compositors (day): — 
Boston, . 
Brockton, 
Fall River, . 
Lawrence, 
Lowell, . 
Lynn, 

New Bedford, 
Springfield, . 
Worcester, 
Compositors (job): — 
Boston, . 
Cambridge, 
Fitchburg, 
Holyoke, 
Lawrence, 
Lowell, . 
New Bedford, 
North Adams, 
Springfield, . 
Worcester, 



Stone: — 
Quarry men: — 
Chelmsford, 
Chester, . 
Quincy (W.), 
Rockport, 



Woolen goods: — 

Wool sorters: — 

Holyoke, 

Lawrence, 

Lowell, . 

Weavers: — 

Lawrence,' g?^ 



R.R 


' 











$19.74 



$21.60-24.00 
18.00 

14.13-18.08 
18.00-24.00 
21.45-22.50 
19.44 
18.15-20.90 



13.50-24.00 
16.50 

13.78-19.08 
12.48-17.28 
10.50-16.98-18.00 
12.00-18.00 
14.85 

11.30-16.95 
13.50 
13.50 

8.70-14.50 
13.75-20.62 
18.00-24.00 
10.50-15.00 



18.00—21.00 
19.68 



25.62-27.30 

20.00 

11.00-17.00 

16.00 

16.50-19.50 

19.00 

21.00 

16.00-21.00 

18.00-21.00 



18.00 
16.00 
15.00 
15.00 
15.00 
15.00 
15.00 
14.00 
15.00 
15.00 



9.60-12.00 
13.50-18.00 
12.48 



16.00-17.70 

14.20 

14.00-16.00 

8.00-10.00 
6.00- 8.00 



$22.44 



$20.04-24.90 
18.00 

13.13-16.90 
18.00-24.00 
21.45-22.50 
19.44 
18.15-20.90 



16.50 

16.50-21.00 
13.78-19.08 
12.48-17.28 
10.50-16.98-18.00 
16.50-18.00 
14.85 

11.30-16.95 
13.50 
13.50 

8.70-14.50 
13.75 

18.00-24.00 
10.50-15.00 



18.00-21.00 
19.68 



25.62-27.30 

20.00 

16.00-20.00 

16.00 

16.50-19.50 

19.00 

21.00 

16.00-21.00 

18.00-23.00 

18.00 
18.00 
15.00 
15.00 
15.00 
15.00 
16.00 
14.00 
15.00 
18.00 



10.80-12.00 
13.50-18.00 
13.44 
10.50 



16.00-17.60 

14.20 

15.08 

8.00-10.00 
6.00-8.00 



84 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



The changes in rates of wages in 1909, as shown in Table 4, 
are too few to warrant any deductions as to general tendency. 

The reports on the Statistics of Manufactures classify wage 
earners in groups according to the amount of weekly wages. 
The high-wage group includes those receiving $12 a week or 
over ; the medium-wage group, those receiving $8 to $12 ; and 
the low-wage group, those receiving less than $8. The chang- 
ing percentages of workers in the different groups from year 
to year indicate the general tendency of wage rates, whether 
upward or downward. The following tables and the chart op- 
posite page 86 show this movement for male wage earners : — 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



85 



1*- < 



Is 
1 s 


cm' id i-i 

iOMH 


o 
© 
© 
o 


1 B 

1 en 
i *"* 


00— i— l 

t>no) 
cm' id i-3 

CO CM rH 


o 
o 
d 
o 


1 ^ 


io co <o 
co -* oq 
cttt^esi 

KJNH 


o 
© 
d 

o 


! s 


Tf O CO 
©OOS 

r^ oi cc 


o 
o 
d 
o 


! o 

i 3 


ooih 

CM Tt< CO 

odd 

U5MH 


o 
© 
d 

c 


1 «"> 

° 

! a 


—100 — 1 

""*! °°. ". 


© 
© 
d 

o 


s 

en 


»o i-i Tti 
t--co en 

ded id 


o 
o 
d 
o 


1 


'OH'* 
T«COrH 


o 
© 
d 
o 


§ 

en 


rH t-CM 

cd id od 

T*< CO r- 1 


© 
d 
© 


en* 

s 


CO IOCM 
t>-OSCO 

cd id i^ 


o 
© 
d 

o 


s 

00 


CO CM CM 

(Drt CM 

—led id 

Ttl CO CM 


o 

o 

I 


00 


CO OS 00 
CM CO CO 

Tti cm' CO 

Ttl CO CM 


o 
o 
d 
o 


en 
eo 


00 CO CO 
•H OS 00 

odd© 

Ttl CO CM 


o 
© 
d 
o 


en 

■ oo 


CO ©N- 
COOS T* 

oo'dd 

■^ CO CM 


© 
© 
d 
© 


1 en 

2 


OS IO CO 
Osf-CN 
—J 00 OS 
IOCM rH 


© 
© 
© 
© 


1 "» 
en 
00 


OS O -H 

rH CM CO 

cm' osoo' 

IO CM rH 


© 
© 
d 

© 


en 

s 


OS CM OS 
CO rH Ttl 
CO 00 00 


© 
© 
© 
© 


1 


CM -H t- 

in oq co 

CO O0 t^ 
IOCM rH 


© 
o 
© 

© 


en 

00 


■*(DO 
CO_rH lO 
Tti 00 l^ 
IOCM rH 


8 

© 
© 


or" 
H 
o 


Mi 









o 










CO IO t-h 


© 




CM Ttl CO 






rH OS© 


s 




CO t« CM 






© 




CM TfKM 








s 




r)(<NCO 




St^CO 






© 






T ~ l 










CM f-© 


© 






© 




T-H CO ^f 








s 




OS CO CO 




CO CO OS 


o 




t-h CO Tti 








© 




rH OS OS 








© 




rHTjH-HH 








o 




IO © Ttl 












rH Ttl rj< 


o 




T* CO© 


© 




CD©CO 








8 










7-1 






© 




CO IT- 00 








© 




HMrin 








© 


^. 






01 






H 


rH CO IO 


© 


H 






<! 













© IO IO 


© 


H 


O rH OO 




H 


oo r^-* 


© 










«*! 






v ~^ 


NCOOS 


© 


DO 




d 


q 


co io 




o 
o 

O 




rH 






lOlOOl 


o 


z 


OS © OS 


© 












H 










O 

O 


CM OS OS 


© 


T*r^ N 






© 




CO io 






r>- os -*i 

CM rH lO 


s 




OOOSCM 


© 




CM CO 








© 




OS 00 rH 












rHCCO 


© 










©00 rH 


© 




CM rH CO 


© 




rHCO IO 






f- N CO 


© 




!>•■<*< r>. 






O-N 

rH CO lO 


8 






8 




rJIHW 










rHCOlO 


© 














































m"S I* 










SSrS 













lO 00 CO 


© 




COOO Tt< 


© 




CM Ttl CM 












"COO IO 


© 




CO ©CM 


© 




CM lO CM 












Tt< ©lO 


© 






© 




CM Ttl CM 






N Ttl OS 


© 




OS COCO 








© 




CM -"ti CO 












OS CM 00 


© 










rHH/M 


© 










O ©OS 


© 






o 




CM -cH CO 








© 
© 
© 

© 




CO Ttl CM 








CM Ttl CO 






© 




NCOOS 








© 




rH Tt< CO 






OS CO O0 


© 




CO CM © 






COCO © 


8 










th 








H 

H 


Ttl 00 CO 


© 


ideo'd 


© 










<! 






o 

<5 






t>MO) 


o 


CM t^OS 


© 








3 








© 


o 
o 


© CO CO 






© 










o 

o 










IO ©CO 


© 


fc 


rH CO CM 


© 




rH CO IO 




J 




T_l 


o 




© 


00 OS CM 






© 




rH CO IO 








© 




rH CO rH 






rH CD CM 


© 




rHCOlO 












CM IO CM 


© 




COOSN 


© 




rHCO TJH 








© 




CO rH Tt< 








© 




rHCO-rX 






T« 1-- OS 


© 










CONOS 


© 




rHCO Tfl 






© N CO 


© 




OS IO IO 












rH CO IO 


^ 














































fci"S * 












WSJ 





1 1 1 


1 


1 1 1 


1 


OSH/N 

oq r>. co 

Tti od d 

TJH CO rH 


© 
o 
© 

© 


lOCO CM 

°°. "^ "*. 
CMr^d 

TJH CO rH 


© 
o 
© 

© 


t~ CO t~ 

T)H H CO 
t^N IO 

CO CO CM 


© 
© 
© 
© 


t^ T« OS 
OS TJH lO 

ddd 

Ttl CO rH 


© 
© 
© 

o 


IO TJH rH 
CO OS T*H 

COOSrH 

CO CO CM 


© 
© 
© 
© 


TJH O CO 
rH OS OS 

1^ dcM 

COCO CM 


© 
© 

© 

© 


Ttl IO rH 

00©r-H 

id© tj5 

CO Tfl CM 


© 
o 
d 
© 


HJU5H 
t>-Tj< 00 

id d Ttl 

CO CO CM 


© 
© 
© 
© 


©CON- 

cm os oq 

rH Tti CO 
COCO CO 


8 

© 
© 


COOtH 
CM IOCM 

CM id cm' 


o 
© 
© 

CO 


CM t^ rH 

os Tt; co 

CM' IO rH 
CO CO CO 


© 
© 

d 
© 


rH © OS 
CM CO rH 

cm" id cm' 

CO CO CO 


© 
© 
© 

o 


© CM OS 
OS ©OS 

did co 

CO CO CO 


o 
o 
d 
© 


CO CO Ttl 

os cm oq 
Tti d od 

CO CO CM 


© 
© 
© 

© 


OS IO CO 

oqio io 
id id od 

CO CO CM 


© 
© 
© 

© 


© t^co 

© t^ CM 

d Tt<d 

CO CO CM 


o 
o 
© 
© 


rHrHOO 

os cm oq 
Tti id d 

COCO CM 


© 
© 
© 

C5 


III 





o a 

1 1 

.2 v 
V a 

ft 

a a 



I- 

pos 

.Sft 

> X 






22 



j a 

s Is 



# McS 

Em 



86 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

These tables show the general movement of wages in Massa- 
chusetts for male factory employees from 1890 to 1906 in all 
industries, and to 1908 in boots and shoes, cotton goods and 
woolen goods. The method of tabulating the returns in differ- 
ent censuses of manufactures has changed so often as to make 
absolute comparison impossible. From 1890 to 1898 employees 
were classified by wage groups as males and females. From 
1899 to 1908, with the exception of 1904, the classification was 
for adult males, and females and young persons under twenty- 
one years. It is impossible to learn the wages of adult males 
in the first series of years, or of all males in the last series ; so 
comparisons must be within these two series, and not between 
them. A different method was introduced in 1907, so the 
figures in the table for 1906 are taken from the Statistics of 
Labor published in 1907, and are from the census of manufac- 
tures taken in 1906, which included returns from each factory 
for the years 1905 and 1906. In all other cases the figures are 
from the Statistics of Manufactures; and are taken from the 
first year of each two-years comparison. In the censuses of 
1907 and 1908, there is no such classification for all industries 
as in the previous years. 

The number of wage groups has been reduced to three, to 
conform to the method introduced in 1907, which will probably 
be continued. The high-wage group contains those receiving $12 
a week or over, the medium-wage group those receiving from 
$8 to $12 a week, and the low-wage group those receiving less 
than $8 a week. 

The percentage in the medium-wage group has not been 
plotted on the chart, as the added lines would have been con- 
fusing, and the movement in the high and low groups is most im- 
portant. The middle group does not show the marked changes 
of the other groups, as the number from the lower group have 
moved up to take the places of those who have passed from the 
medium to the high wage earners. 

The vertical black mark on the chart marks the change in 
classification from all males to adult males. 

In the first series of years the change was not very marked 
in any group, the number of high-wage earners in the boot and 



5 h 

Ui >. 

oo 
or 5! 

70 

*5 

(P 

55 

?c 

f c 
3$ 
30 

to 

5 

73 

7* 

& 

re 

0- 
+o 
55 

30 
Z$ 
Zo 
/$ 

/o 

5 



m<" mi niz /Ti3 /^i iris /.fit, /F97 /rir 1F77 1900 /ici / fez 1103 ti»y /?o t>- /vet 11707 mot 

ill 4- HIG/I-W^E GROUP MALE EMPLOYED •rt^^N^i-N^lfeiliH^^ 



, 



: ,: [__:_ L 




-Cotton Goods - — ■>•»»- Boors ano Shoes. i^o-*jf, All at^es . 1T11- 



I 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 87 

shoe industry showing some decrease, however, with an upward 
movement in the number of cotton goods workers receiving less 
than $8 per week. The general tendency of wages was down- 
ward in all industries. From 1899 up to the present, how- 
ever, the general movement toward higher wages has been clearly 
marked. In the manufacture of boots and shoes the number 
of adult males receiving $12 or more per week has risen from 
21,084 to 34,564, or an increase of 63.9 per cent., while there 
has been a decrease in the number receiving less than $8 per 
week of 17.2 per cent. The most striking fact about the move- 
ment of wages is that the change has affected all wage groups 
about equally. Every increase in the number of men receiv- 
ing the high wage has been accompanied by a decrease in the 
number receiving the low wage. The average wage of all 
workers in all industries taken together has advanced, but this 
advance has not been very much greater among the more efficient 
than among the less efficient. This is very remarkable, when 
we consider the number of foreigners in the cotton and woolen 
industries, and the competition that we should expect to find 
among the workers in the low-wage group. But, although the 
percentage of those receiving less than $8 per week is still 
large, it has declined greatly in the past decade, for, whereas 
more than 50 per cent, of the adult male cotton workers re- 
ceived less than $8 per week in 1899, in 1908 only 3,170 were 
in that class, while in woolen goods the number decreased from 
40 per cent, to less than 25 per cent. 

The special report on employees and wages of the United 
State census for 1890-1900 shows that there was no appre- 
ciable advance of wages prior to 1900 in 2sTew England. In the 
case of males sixteen years of age and over the rates for all occu- 
pations in the Xew England States show practically no change 
for the decade. For females sixteen years of age and over the 
returns in the form of rates are very few, and no specific occu- 
pations are shown except in the middle States. The rates tabu- 
lated under all occupations combined show little change in the 
!New England States. For females under sixteen the rates are 
not shown for different sections of the country. The few rates 
tabulated for all sections combined, under the head of all occu- 



88 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

pations, indicate slight increase of rates. The returns of earn- 
ings for males sixteen and over in the New England States are 
slightly more numerous than those of rates. The only tabula- 
tion is for all occupations combined, in which the earnings show 
a slight increase, whereas the rates show practically no change. 
Earnings for females sixteen years of age and over in the New 
England States tabulated under all occupations combined show 
a slight increase, and are somewhat higher than the rates tabu- 
lated under this head. The earnings for males under sixteen 
are shown by sections, a slight increase being indicated for the 
New England States. The earnings for the New England 
States are much higher than those for the central States, the 
returns for the middle States being intermediate between the 
two extremes. Since part of the returns are in the form of 
rates and part in the form of earnings, no summary of the 
wages of the whole number of males sixteen and over or of 
females sixteen and over can be made. It is evident, however, 
from the various tabulations in the several sections, that wages 
changed very little for females sixteen and over, and increased 
only slightly for females sixteen and over in the New England 
States. 

The wage statistics given in these exhibits, fragmentary and 
disconnected as they are, show clearly that there has been a 
general upward movement during the last decade, interrupted 
by the panic of 1907, but resumed in 1908 and 1909. The ex- 
tent of the upward movement cannot be measured in definite 
percentage. Kegarding the relative advance of prices and wages 
in general, however, the generalization may be hazarded that 
prices have advanced approximately 40 per cent., while wages 
have risen perhaps 25 per cent, since 1897. During the last 
two years, after the resumption of business activity following 
the depression, the advance of prices has clearly been greater 
than the rise of wages. 

The slowness with which wages followed prices in the recent 
upward movement is exhibited in the chart opposite this page. 
It will be seen from this chart that (1) food prices rose in 1891, 
and wages rose in the next year, 1892; (2) food prices fell in 
1892, and wages fell in 1893 ; (3) food prices fell in 1893, and 



119 

lit 

m 
in 

m 

113 

in 
tu 
no 
an 

io7 

Itf 

l*f 
A>3 
fCX 
/Of 
ICC 

if 
it 

ii 
% 

n\ 
m 






RELATIVE MOVEMENT OF AVERAGE WAGES IN ALL INDUSTRIES AND RETAIL PRICES OF FOOD .WEIGHTED' AVERAGE, 1890-99, BEING 100. 



/90t S9Q.Z. /9t3 J90j 1905 110b /907 



II, — 








m\ - 






lll:\-~ ~ - 






115 \ — 








ULf L- '--- ■ 








II -i\ - 






112 i — — 





















vf 

Si 



■?B. 



■ llliHillllllllllll llllllliiltl'lllllltWtfit 



HTfflH I ■ : U I . ..' J j 

- FOOD 



. :•:... j.. v.. .J..i!~:-i... .i__^ 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 89 

wages fell in 1894; (4) food prices reached the low point of the 
decade in 1897, wages in 1898; (5) food prices started on the 
upward course in 1898, wages in 1899; (6) food prices re- 
acted slightly in 1903, wages in 1904; (7) food prices started 
to move upward again in 1904, wages in 1905. 

Attention may be directed to the recent increases of wages by 
railway companies, as showing the usual tendency of wages to 
respond in belated fashion to an advance in prices. 



90 COST OF LIVING. [May, 



IV. 
CHIEF ITEMS OF EXPENDITURE. 



The effect of the recent advance of prices upon the chief items 
of family expenditure will be considered in the following chap- 
ters. The percentages of total expenditure made for various 
purposes and the percentage of income expended by 1,189 nor- 
mal families in Massachusetts are given in the eighteenth an- 
nual report of the United States Commissioner of Labor, 1903, 
as follows : — 

Food, 40.90 

Rent, . 20.95 

Clothing, 13.12 

Fuel, 3.74 

Lighting, 1.27 

Sundries, 20.02 

Total of all, 100.00 

Percentage of income expended, 92.25 

A. FOOD. 

Examination of family budgets discloses significant facts re- 
garding comparative percentages of expenditure for different 
foods. The budget statistics published in the report of the 
United States Commissioner of Labor cited in the preceding 
paragraph, show the expenditures of 253 Massachusetts fami- 
lies, as follows, the figures having been collected in the year 
1901: — 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



91 



Expenditure for Food by Massachusetts Families. 1 



Articles. 


Amount. 


Percentage. 


Beef: — 






Fresh 


$56.14 




Salt, 


24.75 


21.8 


Hog products: — 




Fresh, 


$21.12 




Salt 


14.68 






11.81 








12.8 
4.3 


Other meat, 


15.92 


Fish, 


19.57 


5.3 


Poultry, 


12.83 


3.5 


Eggs 


14.37 


3.9 


Milk 


29.60 


8.0 






8.7 


Cheese, 


2.71 


0.7 






0.8 


Coffee 


4.52 


1.2 


Sugar, 


20.32 


5.5 


Molasses 


2.53 


0.7 




24.73 


6.7 


Bread 


8.14 


2.2 


Rice, 


1.93 


0.5 


Potatoes 


11.22 


3.0 






2.7 


Fruit 


9.81 


2.7 


Vinegar, pickles and condiments 


4.18 


1.1 




14.61 


3.9 


Total per family for food, 


§370.20 


100.00 



1 The items of expenditure above do not represent in every case the average for the total fam- 
ilies shown, but the average for the" number of families having the kind of expenditure specified. 
For instance, some families may not have used pork at all, others may not have used tea at all. 



It will be noticed that the percentage of expenditure for beef, 
fresh and salt, 21.8, is higher than that for any other article of 
food. The total percentage of expenditure for meat foods is 
38.9 per cent., or approximately two-fifths of the total amount 
spent for food. Flour, meal and bread taken together make up 
8.9 per cent, of the food expenditure, thus taking second place in 



92 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

order of importance. Butter comes third, with 8.7 per cent., 
and milk fourth, with 8.4 per cent. The fifth place is held by 
sugar, with 5.5 per cent. This is a strikingly high percentage 
for a single commodity, Doubtless few persons realize the high 
comparative importance of sugar in the family budget. The 
percentage expended for this article is higher than that for fish, 
which is only 5.3 per cent., and for poultry, which is only 3.5 
per cent. 

1. Meat. 

The immense importance of meat in the consumption of the 
average family is shown by the fact that it constitutes roughly 
two-fifths of the food expenditures of families of medium in- 
comes. The total expenditure for food, it may be remarked in 
this connection, represents from 40 to 45 per cent, of the entire 
cost of living of the average family. The people of the United 
States are the most liberal meat eaters on the face of the globe, 
except those in Australasia. The per capita consumption of 
meat in this country in terms of dressed meat was 185.8 pounds 
in 1900. The figures for other countries are about as follows: 
United Kingdom, 121.3 pounds; Germany, 115.94 pounds; 
France, 78.9 pounds; Denmark, 76 pounds; Australia, 262.6 
pounds. 

The average meat consumption in the United States has, how- 
ever, long been declining. Seventy years ago the per capita 
consumption of beef represented one-half of the national dietary. 
In 1909 it had declined to about one-third. This decline has 
come about primarily because of reduction of the meat supply. 
The falling off of the stock of meat animals may be shown by 
computing the entire stock of cattle, sheep and swine in meat 
pounds for the census years and deducting the exports for those 
years, so that the remaining pounds represent roughly the stock 
for national meat supply. If the stock so computed for 1840 be 
regarded as 100, then by 1860 the per capita stock of meat 
animals had declined to 82.5, by 1880 to 72.4, by 1890 to 79.4 
and by 1900 to 59.3. Thus in seventy years the per capita stock 
of animals for the national meat supply has fallen to less than 
three-fifths of its former proportions. 

The recent advance of the price of beef has been the subject 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 93 

of chief complaint with reference to the increased cost of living. 
The statistics of average prices in the State, presented elsewhere 
in this report, show that beef for roasting advanced 37 per cent. 
in price from 1897 to 1910. Fresh pork rose 79 per cent, and 
salt pork 92.4. The average prices paid in the State, accord- 
ing to. quotations gathered in various cities and towns, at the 
end of March, 1910, were as follows: — 

Beef : — -Per Pound. 

Rib, $0,184 

Rib roll, 165 

Rump, back, . . . . . . . . .275 

Rump, face, . . . . . 190 

Shoulder, 146 

Sirloin, 256 

Vein, .197 

Pork : — 

Chop, 203 

Roast, 192 

Spare-rib, 143 

Salt, 177 

Ham, whole, 205 

Ham, sliced, 285 

The extent of the very recent advance in meat prices appears 
from the records of prices to have been exaggerated in the pop- 
ular mind. The figures for March prices in the last three years, 
taken from the books of seven large retail dealers in Boston and 
suburbs, show the range of prices to have been as follows : — 



Kind 


of Meat. 


March, 1908. 


March, 1909. 


March, 1910. 


Tops of rounds, . 




Cents. 
23-30 


Cents. 
25-30 


Cents. 
25-30 


Bottom of rounds, 


. *. 


14-20 


15-20 


16-20 


Bacon. 




18-20 


15-20 


16-20 



One fact of considerable significance that has been brought 
out through the investigation of beef prices is the relatively high 
cost of the poorer cuts in Boston. The investigation of Cana- 
dian prices shows that the prices of cheaper grades of meat are 
as a rule lower in Canadian cities than in Boston. This fact 



94 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

is somewhat surprising, in view of the recognized preference of 
the Boston demand for the better cuts of meat. It is well known 
to the beef trade that heavy beef of the finest quality commands 
the best prices in the Boston market. This fact would lead 
one to expect that the prices of cheaper cuts would be lower in 
this city than elsewhere. The high prices of the poorer grades 
are doubtless to be explained by the demand of the Jewish pop- 
ulation. Only the forequarters, including the neck cuts, are 
bought by the Jewish consumers. It may be noted also in this 
connection that the additional cost of kosher meat is about 2 
cents a pound. It is stated also that the kosher cattle, for which 
the Jewish consumer pays 2 cents a pound more, are in general 
of an inferior grade. Cattle with good lungs easily pass the 
kosher inspection, although the quality of the beef in other re- 
spects may be distinctly inferior. 

It deserves to be noted that the increase in the price of meat 
has not been confined to the United States ; it appears to have 
been world-wide. All of the meat-exporting countries show 
higher prices for their exports in recent years than those of a 
decade ago, and all of the meat-importing countries show higher 
rates in their import figures and in the current market quota- 
tions. Statistics of exports from Australia indicate, in the case 
of beef preserved by cold process, an advance in export price 
from $5.23 per 100 pounds in 1899 to $5.40 in 1908; mutton 
and lambs, from $3.82 per 100 pounds in 1899 to $6.47 in 1908, 
— an advance of 3 per cent, in the price of fresh beef and of 
practically 70 per cent, in that of mutton and lamb. Similar 
conditions are disclosed by the statistics of exports of meats from 
New Zealand, which cover a period from 1896 to 1908. The 
average export price of frozen beef has in that period risen from 
$4.53 per 100 pounds to $5.22 ; that of frozen lamb, from $6.09 
to $8.07; and that of frozen mutton, from $4.57 to $5.90,— 
an advance in average export price of 15 per cent, in the case of 
frozen beef, 3 2% per cent, in that of frozen lamb and nearly 
30 per cent, in that of frozen mutton exported from New Zea- 
land. In Argentina the export prices of various commodities 
are periodically fixed by the government as a basis of trade val- 
uations. Of frozen beef, the stated export price for 1897-99 
was $1.75 per 100 pounds, for 1900-08, $4.38 ; of frozen mut- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 95 

ton, for 1897-99, $1.75 per 100 pounds, for 1900-08, $3.50; 
and of jerked beef, for 1897, $2.98 per 100 pounds, and in 
1908, $5.09 per 100 pounds, — an advance in the period from 

1897 to 1908 of 150 per cent, in the price of frozen beef, 71 
per cent, in that of jerked beef and 100 per cent, in that of 
frozen mutton. In Canada the value of fresh beef exports 
advanced from an annual average of 6.1 cents per pound in 

1898 to 8.2 cents in 1909; that of mutton, from 6.1 cents per 
pound in 1898 to 11.2 cents in 1909; of pork, from 3.3 cents 
per pound in 1898 to 9 cents in 1909 ; and of butter, from 18.1 
cents per pound in 1898 to 24 cents in 1909. 

Meat imports into the United Kingdom in the period from 
1896 to 1908 show in nearly every case advance, the principal 
exception being fresh beef, of which the average price per 100 
pounds decreased from $8.21 in 1896 to $7.96 in 1908. Mean- 
time, the import price per 100 pounds of salted beef advanced 
from $5.33 to $8.15 ; of preserved beef, from $11.39 to $18.46 ; 
of mutton, fresh, from $7.07 to $8.06 ; mutton, preserved, from 
$7.15 to $10.37 ; of bacon, from $7.50 to $11.06 ; of hams, from 
$9.34 to $10.94; of pork, from $7.67 to $8.56; of butter, 
from $24.57 to $27.84; and of cheese, from $10.61 to $14.11. 
A similar advance is apparent in the price of imported eggs, 
from 15.4 cents per dozen in 1896 to 19.2 cents in 1908. The 
largest proportionate advances are in preserved beef, 52 per 
cent. ; salted beef, 53 per cent. ; bacon, 47% per cent - j preserved 
mutton, 45 per cent. ; and cheese, 33 per cent. ; while pork 
shows a rise of 12 per cent. ; fresh butter, 13 per cent. ; mutton, 
14 per cent. ; hams, 17 per cent. ; and fresh beef a fall of 3 
per cent. 

The fact that the percentage of advance in prices of fresh 
meats, especially those exported in the chilled or frozen state, 
has not been so great as that of salted or preserved meats, is sup- 
posed to be due, in part at least, to the reductions made during 
the past decade in the cost of chilling or freezing and transport- 
ing meats of this class, and to the increased supply of fresh 
meats in European markets, resulting from the growth of the 
system. On the other hand, prices of fresh mutton have ad- 
vanced more than those of fresh beef, the reason being, pre- 
sumably, in part at least, the comparatively slow growth in the 



96 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

world's supply of sheep. The advance in the price of wool is 
likewise explained. 

The responsibility for the present high prices of meat is va- 
riously placed, in popular discussion, upon (1) the packer, (2) 
the farmer and (3) the retailer. The popular impression is 
that the advance of prices has been brought about through some 
form of combination or manipulation. To one taking an im- 
partial view of the situation, and making an unbiased inquiry, 
however, certain natural conditions which have affected the 
supply and the demand of meat, in ways that would tend to in- 
crease the price, stand out clearly. 

The first outstanding fact with reference to the meat problem 
is the decrease of the supply in general. The number of food 
animals in the United States has diminished by 5,000,000 since 
1901, while the number of consumers has increased by 12,000,- 
000 during the same period. The statistics of the Department 
of Agriculture give the total number of cattle in the United 
States January 1, 1901, as 62,330,000; sheep, 59,750,000; 
swine, 57,000,000 ; total, 179,000,000. The corresponding fig- 
ures for January 1, 1910, are: cattle, 69,000,000; sheep, 
57,250,000 ; swine, 47,750,000 ; total, 174,000,000. The aggre- 
gate number of the three classes of food animals has thus de- 
creased by 5,000,000. The total number of food animals to 
each 100 persons decreased from 231 in 1901 to 193 in 1910, 
— a reduction of 16 per cent. 

The average number of cattle on farms in 1840 was .88 per 
capita; in 1860, .81; in 1880, .79; in 1890, .92; in 1900, .69. 
Since 1900, cattle have probably not increased absolutely, while 
population has increased about 15 per cent. The supply of 
sheep and swine also shows a decline in proportion to the popu- 
lation. 

The following tables bring together the salient facts regard- 
ing the meat supply of the country 1 : — 

1 For further statistics of the meat supply, see Appendix I. 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



97 



Live Stock on Farms (in Round Millions) , 



Year. 


Cattle 

(including 

Beef Cows 

and 

Milch Cows) . 


Hogs. 


Sheep. 


1880 


33 


34 


41 


1890 


53 


52 


44 


1896 


50 


46 


33 


1897 


51 


48 


32 


1899 


51 


49 


34 


1900 


49 


49 


43 


1901 


68 


51 


42 


1902 


69 


47 


42 


1903, 


70 


49 


43 


1904 


71 


50 


43 


1905 


71 


51 


43 


1906 


71 


52 


43 


1907, 


72 


52 


48 


1908 


72 


52 


51 


1909 


72 


50 


53 


1910 


70 


45 


55 



Number of Meat Animals marketed for Each 1,000 of Population. 



Year. 


Population 

(in 
Millions). 


Cattle. 


Hogs. 


Sheep. 


1880 


50 


- 


- 


- 


1890 


63 


98 


211 


53 


1900, 


76 


94 


235 


90 


1905 


83 


106 


215 


124 


1906 


84 


108 


209 


129 


1907 


86 


111 


211 


116 


1908, 


87 


108 


234 


116 


1909 


88 


102 


208 


117 



98 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Movement of Live Stock at Primary Markets. 1 



Yeak. 


Cattle. 


Swine. 


Sheep. 


1880,- 


1,382,000 


7,059,000 


- 


1890, . 


6,195,000 


13,263,000 


3,331,000 3 


1900, 


7,145,000 


17,824,000 


6,859,000 


1905 


8,805,000 


17,825,000 


10,271,000 


1906 


9,082,000 


17,525,000 


10,882,000 


1907, 


9,506,000 


18,109,000 


9,958,000 


1908 


9,367,000 


20,415,000 


10,105,000 


1909, 


8,982,000 


18,298,000 


10,342,000 


1910,* 


1,845,000 


3,900,000 


1,877,000 



1 Chicago, Kansas City, St. Louis, Omaha, Sioux City, St. Joseph, Mo., Denver. 

2 Chicago only. 3 St. Joseph and Sioux City missing. 
4 January 1, 1910, to April 1, 1910. 



The hog receipts, January 1 to April 1, 1910, were about 
1,700,000 smaller than those of a year ago; the sheep receipts, 
200,000 smaller; beef receipts, about the same as in the pre- 
ceding year. 

Boston and New England are now almost entirely dependent 
on the west for their meat supply. To-day all but a small frac- 
tion of the beef and mutton received at Boston is supplied by the 
western packers. The number of cattle and sheep coming to the 
Boston market from New England sources is an almost negligi- 
ble quantity. The slaughtering business, moreover, has grad- 
ually declined, until now a very large part of the beef comes 
here dressed. Some hogs are killed in Brighton and Somer- 
ville, but only a small percentage of beef and mutton, although 
all the kosher meat is killed here. There are only two firms 
in Faneuil Hall and Quincy Hall that pretend to slaughter beef 
now. Some choice lambs are raised in New England. For in- 
stance, Swift & Co. raises a small quantity in Aroostook County, 
Maine. The percentage, however, is insignificant. 

The decline of the local meat supply began about forty years 
ago. The dwindling receipts of New England cattle and sheep 
at Boston and the increasing receipts from the west in the period 
1862-74 are shown in the following table: — 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



99 



Receipts of Cattle and Sheep at Boston, 1862-7 '4- (compiled from Report of 
Massachusetts Board of Health) . 







Cattle. 


Sheep and Lambs. 


FROM — 


Total 

Number. 


MEAN NUMBERS. 


Total 

Number. 


MEAN NUMBERS. 




1862- 
74. 


1862- 
64. 


1872- 

74. 


1862- 
74. 


1862- 
64. 


1872- 
74. 


Massachusetts, . 


36,012 


2,770 


4,720 


1,371 


220,204 


16,939 


21,101 


13,420 


Maine, 


138,860 


10,681 


14,353 


2,816 


233,064 


17,928 


30,670 


8,340 


New Hampshire, 


99,003 


7,616 


12,779 


4,313 


476,170 


36,629 


32,823 


26,277 


Vermont, . 


273,962 


21,074 


31,013 


15,809 


1,574,466 


121,113 


95,464 


78,157 


Northern New York, 


60,543 


4,657 


4,306 


5,061 


446,383 


34,337 


16,688 


40,985 


The west, . 


971,056 


74,697 


36,005 


130,307 


1,329,137 


102,241 


32,610 


163,801 


Canada, 


63,958 


4,920 


2,780 


3,125 


721,492 


55,499 


31,359 


65,597 


Totals, 


1,643,394 


126,415 


105,956 


162,802 


5,000,916 


384,686 


260,715 


396,577 



Inspection of the foregoing table shows : ( 1 ) a marked dimi- 
nution in the mean numbers of New England cattle, and sheep 
received in the three years 1872-74, as compared with the mean 
numbers received in the three years 1862-64; and (2) a great 
increase in the mean numbers of cattle and sheep received from 
the west in the three years 1872-74, as compared with the mean 
numbers received in the three years 1862-64. 

The movement of dressed beef from Chicago had begun as 
long ago as 1874, when the State Board of Health estimated that 
not less than one-ninth of the whole supply of beef for that year 
in the Boston market consisted of dressed beef brought from 
the west in refrigerator cars. The population of New England 
increased from 3,487,000 to 5,592,000 in 1900, or 60 per cent. ; 
but the demand of New England for beef and mutton, as well 
as for pork and bacon, has increased out of all proportion to the 
increase in population, owing to its augmented importance as a 
manufacturing region and also as a summer resort. Meanwhile, 
the pressure of population has begun to be felt in the States 
whence come the meat supplies of the Boston market, which still 
continues to supply New England. As New England cannot 
raise its own meats, and the local demands of the middle west 
have cut down its own surplus, Boston has to pay enhanced 
prices for its meats, and so long as the shortage in the west lasts 



100 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



it must continue to do so, or else substitute cheaper forms of 
provender in constructing its dietary. 

The following tables afford a comparison: (1) of the re- 
ceipts of live stock at the Boston markets in the years 1865, 
1874, 1908 and 1909 ; and (2) of the number of animals slaugh- 
tered at the Brighton Abattoir in the years 1874, — the year 
after it was opened, — 1875, 1908 and 1909. 

Inspection of the second table shows at a glance that the 
slaughtering industry has greatly declined in the last twenty- 
five years. 



Receipts of Live Stock at Boston Markets (compiled from Various Sources) . 



Number of — 


1862-74. 


1865. 


1874. 


1908. 


1909. 


Cattle, .... 


1,643,394 


117,866 


163,311 


193,406 


194,224 


Calves 


193,452 


17,795 


17,670 


132,539 


122,152 


Swine, .... 


3,471,644 


99,437 


588,261 


1,479,724 


1,241,366 


Sheep, .... 


5,000,916 


341,331 


363,488 


352,456 


353,309 


Totals, 


10,309,406 


576,429 


1,132,730 


2,158,125 


1,911,051 



Animals slaughtered at Brighton Abattoir (compiled from Various Sources) 





Number of — 


1874. 


1875. 


1908. 


1909. 


Cattle, 


53,419 


66,541 


36,852 


26,096 


Calves, 


12,536 


5,869 


17,661 


22,291 


Sheep, 


303,210 


322,705 


1,784 


1,803 


Swine, 


- 


- 


50,349 


54,270 


Totals 


370,165 


399,115 


106,646 


104,460 



In connection with the present shortage of the local meat 
supply it should be noted, furthermore, that the population of 
the middle west has become so great that its demand is begin- 
ning to equal its supply, and it is becoming increasingly diffi- 
cult to fill the demand of the east. The time is not far distant 
when we shall be obliged to look elsewhere for our meats. One 
beef man said : " In five years the middle west will not send 
anything here, and will have hard work to supply itself." 

The Boston market formerly supplied all New England, and 
it still continues to do so, but there is a decentralizing process in 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 101 

progress which is very apparent. At present 80 per cent, of the 
meats sold in Boston go to greater Boston and about 20 per 
cent, to the rest of New England, only a small fraction going 
beyond. The packers have established branch houses through- 
out New England, which get a good deal of trade formerly done 
by the Boston market. Armour has about forty-five branches 
and Swift & Co. over fifty branches in New England. Another 
factor in this decentralizing movement is found in the twenty- 
five or thirty large public markets, like the Manhattan market, 
scattered through the suburbs, which buy by the carload directly 
from the packers. 

The large hotel trade of New England still depends on the 
Boston market. One concern alone supplies from seven hundred 
to eight hundred hotels in New England during the summer ; 
it also supplies thirty or forty winter hotels in Bermuda, the 
Carolinas, Georgia and Florida. The goods are shipped by 
water or via New York. Many of the winter hotel proprietors 
own summer hotels in the north. They get used to the Boston 
way of doing business, like it, and continue to trade here when 
they move south. They get better service, better packing, more 
care and pains are taken, a higher grade of meat is supplied, 
rind there is very little difference in the cost of transportation. 

In the summer the steamers carry large quantities of meat 
from this market to the Maine hotels. The transatlantic steam- 
ships buy their beef in this market for both the east-bound and 
west-bound trips, except the beef for the crew, which is Ar- 
gentine beef bought in Liverpool. They also buy their bacon in 
England. The mutton used on these boats is generally Aus- 
tralian mutton, bought in England. The railroads buy their 
meats here, in preference to their other terminals. One dining- 
car man whose cars run between Boston and New York, and 
who caters to 1,200 people a day, said: " Boston is the best mar- 
ket in this country; it has the finest facilities and the choicest 
selections." 

The packers have their own commission houses, and they are 
gradually encroaching on the business of the jobbers, who de- 
pend on the commission houses for their supply. The attempt 
of the packers to do a retail business has largely failed. The 
competition of the packers has forced the jobbers of Faneuil Hall 



102 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

and Quincy Hall markets to make an effort to increase their re- 
tail business. One jobber in four years has increased bis Satur- 
day retail business from $100 to $600. This movement is in 
line with the original purpose of Peter Faneuil, from which the 
market has widely departed. At the present time 60 per cent, 
of the business done in these two markets is wholesale, including 
steamships and institutions, and 40 per cent, is retail. 

In the market district alone it is estimated that 50 per cent, is 
sold to stores, 25 per cent, to hotels, steamships and institutions, 
and 25 per cent, to families (retail). 

About 50 per cent, of the concerns in the two markets have 
outside places for storage, either of their own, or in the big 
cold-storage buildings. 

It is claimed that the jobbers' profits become smaller as the 
prices go up. They seem to be doing business on smaller mar- 
gins, relying on a greater volume of business for their profits. 
One jobber said his profits were as follows : — 

100-pound round, profit $1.00 

60-pound rump, profit .50 

60-pound loin, profit 1.50 

Twelve cents a pound is paid by the jobber for dressed beef, 
and he sells it at 12% cents on the average, making a profit on 
a 900-pound beef of $4.50. One man claimed that his gross 
jobbing profit was about 5 per cent, and his retail gross profit 
about 15 per cent. The latter was nearer 20 per cent, when the 
prices were lower. Out of this come rents, salaries and other ex- 
penses, all of which have increased in the last few years. 

The figures of number and value of farm animals, published 
in the " Crop Reporter " for February, 1910, show a falling off 
of the number of beef cattle on farms, January 1, 1910, as com- 
pared with the same date of the preceding year. The number 
for 1909 is 49,379,000; for 1910, 47,279,000, — a decrease of 
2,100,000. The number of swine fell off even in greater degree, 
from 54,147,000 in 1909 to 47,782,000 in 1910, — a decrease 
of 6,365,000. The number of sheep, however, increased slightly 
from 56,084,000 in 1909 to 57,216,000 in 1910. The report 
shows a decrease in production in all the great beef-raising 
States, as compared with the figures of the preceding year, with 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



103 



a single exception, Wyoming, which had an increase of 10 per 
cent. In Texas, Oklahoma, Montana and Kansas the decrease 
was 7 per cent. ; in Arkansas, 11 per cent. ; in Colorado and Ari- 
zona, 2 per cent. ; in New Mexico and North and South Dakota, 
4 per cent. ; in Iowa, 6 per cent. ; and Nebraska, 5 per cent. 

During four days early in April Chicago received only 
2,429 carloads of live stock, as compared with 3,466 a year ago. 
The shortage from January 1 to the end of the first week of 
April was 10,234 cars, the principal deficiency being in hogs, — 
759,000 head. Five western markets showed a shortage of 
1,650,000 hogs, as compared with the same period in 1909. The 
sheep shortage in these five markets was 230,000. There is 
declared to be, also, a notable falling off in the weight and qual- 
ity of the beef cattle sent to market, as the high prices have in- 
duced speculators to scour every part of the country for beef 
cattle to send to market. 

The falling off in the supply of hogs is much greater than 
that in the supply of beef. In general, hogs mature more rap- 
idly for market, and a shortage of the farm supply makes itself 
felt more quickly. After the panic of 1907, farmers slaugh- 
tered their hogs on a great scale during 1908, taking advantage 
of the high prices. At the same time the price of corn was ad- 
vancing, thus making it increasingly expensive for farmers to 
raise hogs. The figures of the hog supply, compiled by the 
Cincinnati " Price Current," are interesting in this connec- 
tion : — 



Number of Hogs slaughtered in the West, and Prices. 



Years. 


Number. 


Average 
Annual Price 

per 
100 Pounds. 


Highest 
Yearly Price 

per 
100 Pounds. 


1871-73 

1876-80 

1881-85 

1886-90 

1891-95 

1896-1900 

1900-05 

1906-10 


5,555,000 
8,890,000 
10,370,000 
11,845,000 
14,435,000 
19,600,000 
23,180,000 
26,427,000 


$5.00 
4.80 
5.40 
4.40 
4.80 
3.75 
5.65 
6.15 


$6.85 
7.10 
6.65 
5.25 
5.85 
4.05 
6.80 
7.75 



104 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

The highest total for the last ten years was 28,995,000, for 
the year ending March 1, 1909. During the last year the 
total was only 24,150,000. The cause of the short supply of 
hogs during the past year is compactly stated by Charles B. 
Murray, president of the Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce, in 
his testimony before the United States Commission on Wages 
and Prices of commodities : — 

The explanation for the short supplies of hogs the past year and the 
extreme prices reached lies largely in the fact that the price of corn 
was higher than its value for feeding to hogs, and with this was a 
drouth in the hog-producing regions which so dried up the water 
sources late in the season that it was serious in its effect upon such 
stock in many sections. Under such conditions the hog growers turned 
the animals into market, without regard to the need of maintaining 
the breeding stock basis for future supplies. With a decrease of 
5,000,000 in the slaughtering supply of the hogs for the past year, 
the advance in prices of both animals and product was a natural com- 
mercial incident. 

The shortage of the supply was stated by witnesses before this 
commission to be the chief factor in the upward movement of the 
price of hogs. For the first nineteen days of March the total 
western packing was only 765,000 hogs, as compared with 1,- 
190,000 for the corresponding period in 1909, or a decrease of 
425,000 hogs. The dealer who made this statement expressed 
the opinion that the farming land in the west, where the ma- 
jority of hogs are raised, has so advanced in cost that it is not 
so profitable to-day for the farmer to raise hogs, and also cattle, 
for market as it is for him to raise grain, from which he gets 
a larger and quicker return. The high cost of corn has also 
been a factor here. 

A second fact of significance in connection with the increased 
prices of meat products, in addition to the decrease of supply, 
is the notable extension of the export trade, culminating in 1906 
with heavy dumping of beef at low prices into European mar- 
kets. This was followed by a great decline of exports in re- 
cent years. The exports of beef and beef products averaged 
32,000,000 pounds yearly from 1851 to 1855; 109,000,000 
pounds from 1871 to 1875; 521,000,000 pounds from 1891 to 
1895; 610,000,000 pounds from 1896 to 1900; 617,000,000 
pounds from 1901 to 1905; and 733,000,000 pounds for the 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 105 

year 1906. Then came the decline to 690,000,000 pounds in 
1907; to 579,000,000 pounds in 1908; and 419,000,000 pounds 
in 1909. The enormous exportation of beef products prior to 
1906 combined with the heavy demand in this country to ad- 
vance prices. The dumping , process that went on in the few 
years preceding 1906 was a considerable factor in bringing 
about the shortage of the supply within the country, which is 
at the bottom of the recent advance of prices. 

A third factor, of the greatest importance in its influence 
on the supply and price of meat products, was the breaking up 
of the great range herds, through the enforcement of the " no- 
fence " law by the national government, in the first half of the 
last decade, 1900-05. The abnormal movement of beef cattle 
to market, which was thus stimulated, naturally affected the sup- 
ply. In 1908 deliveries fell off greatly, and the decrease con- 
tinued in 1909. The decline of exports, to which reference has 
just been made, was in large part a consequence of this change. 
Mr. Walter C. Howey, in a recent article on the beef supply, 
remarks concerning the breaking up of the ranges * : — 

To-day even the big outfits of the northwest are fast closing out. The 
opening of the Rosebud and other Indian reservations to homesteaders, 
the " nesting " of settlers about water-holes, the irrigation farm move- 
ment and the industry of the land departments of the continental rail- 
roads have wound up the business of all the great grass-feeding out- 
fitters above mentioned, whose single consignments to market filled a 
dozen long trains. The average shipment to-day is of from two to five 
carloads of 40 head each. 

The transformation of the ranges into farm lands meant the 
change from grass-fed beef to corn-fed beef. The farmers who 
have taken up land on the ranges have not been able to keep up 
the volume of beef production to the former proportions. Not 
only this : the expense of raising the corn-fed beef of the farms 
is much heavier than that of the grass-fed beef of the ranges. 

This change from grass-fed to corn-fed beef directs attention 
to another fact of fundamental importance in its effect upon 
meat prices. This is the advance in the price of corn. The 
average farm price for corn in the period 1895-1900 was 28 
cents; the price in 1901 was 60.5 cents, on account of a two- 

1 See Walter C. Howey, "Our Beef Supply as a Great Business," "Review of Reviews," 
March, 1910. 



106 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

thirds crop caused by a drouth; the average price for the five 
years 1902-06 was 41.6 cents; in 1907 the price rose to 51.6 
cents; in 1908, to 60.6 cents. In January, 1909, the Chicago 
price was 52.9; and in January, 1910, 63.7 cents. There is 
a wide difference between the cost of beef raised on range grass 
and beef fed on 60-cent corn. The advance of the price of 
corn has been brought about partly by failure of eastern crops 
and partly by the development of new uses for corn, such as 
the manufacture of denatured alcohol, corn syrup and the like. 

The price of other foods that are used in fattening beef has 
also advanced. It requires about 2,500 pounds of cotton-seed 
hulls and about 1,000 pounds of cotton-seed meal to fatten a 
steer. Mr. I. T. Pryor, in a paper read at the convention of 
the Cattle Raisers' Association, San Antonio, March 17 of this 
year, presented an estimate of the comparative cost of fattening 
steers in 1880-90-1900 and 1910. The value of feed consumed 
by a steer thirty years ago, in 1880, when cotton-seed hulls sold 
at $1.50 per ton and cotton-seed meal at $10 per ton, is es- 
timated as between $6 and $7, or 19 per cent, of the value of the 
steer ready for market. Ten years later, in 1890, the same 
amount of feed cost $11.25, or 26 per cent, of the value of the 
steer; ten years later, in 1900, the cost was $17.50, or 36 per 
cent, of the value ; in 1910, with cotton-seed hulls at $10 per ton 
and cotton-seed meal at $30 a ton, the cost of fattening a steer 
is $27.50, which is 45 per cent, of the value. The advance of 
cotton-seed hulls during the thirty years from $1.50 to $10 
per ton, and of cotton-seed meal from $10 to $30 per ton, has 
thus increased greatly the necessary cost of beef production on 
the farm. The following table shows the cost of fattening steers, 
the price and the profit for various years, as calculated by Mr. 
Pryor : — 

Production Cost, Price and Profit for Steers. 

1880. 

Cost of steer, $15.00 

1*4 tons hulls, at $1.50 per ton, 1.87 ] /2 

% ton cotton-seed meal, at $10 per ton, 5.00 

Freight, 4.00 



$26.87% 

Sell 1,000-pound steer at 3V 2 cents, $35; profit, $9.12y 2 . 



§11 RELATIVE WHOLESALE PRICES 

W ma, mm pork 



AVCRnCE PRICE IPW-I 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 107 



1890. 

Cost of steer, $20.00 

l 1 /^ tons hulls, at $3 per ton, 3.75 

Y2 ton cotton-seed meal, at $15 per ton, 7.50 

Freight, 5.00 



$36.25 
Sell 1,050-pound steer at 4 cents, $42 ; profit, $5.75. 

1900. 

Cost of steer, $25.00 

l 1 /^ tons hulls, at $6 per ton, 7.50 

y% ton cotton-seed meal, at $20 per ton, 10.00 

Freight, . 5.00 



$47.50 
Sell 1,075-pound steer at 4V 2 cents, $4S.37 1 / 2 ; profit, 87V 2 cents. 

1910. 

Cost of steer, $30.00 

1^4 tons hulls, at $10 per ton, 12.50 

x /2 ton cotton-seed meal, at $30 per ton, 15.00 

Freight, 6.00 



$63.50 
Sell 1,100-pound steer at 5V 2 cents, $60.50 ; loss, $3. 

Still another fact closely connected with the preceding is the 
increased cost of farm lands. The value of western farm land 
has risen enormously during the last ten years. Investigations 
by the Department of Agriculture show that farms of medium 
grade in the north-central States increased in value 35.3 per 
cent, during the five-year period, 1901-05 ; in the western 
States, 40.2 per cent. The value of farm land in these regions 
has risen still higher during the last five years. In 1900 the 
best grazing lands in Oklahoma could be leased for 10 cents per 
acre; steers raised on these lands sold in St. Louis at approxi- 
mately 3% cents per 100 pounds. In 1909 the same lands 
would lease for about $1 per acre ; steers fattened on these lands 
sold in St. Louis for approximately 4% to 5 cents per 100 
pounds. The increase in farm values has unquestionably played 
a considerable part in the advance of beef prices. The increased 
value of farm lands is in itself an effect of the high prices of 



108 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

grain. The greater the price the farmer obtains for his prod- 
ucts, the higher will he the selling value of his land. The pro- 
ductivity of the western lands for purposes of corn and wheat 
production fixes their values. The high value of the farm land 
thus determined makes it relatively unprofitable for the farmer 
to use it for beef production. Thus the high price of corn and 
the increased value of farm lands, which are closely connected 
as cause and effect respectively, have combined to bring about 
an advance of meat prices. 

The salient facts in the present situation with reference to 
meat prices, which have been briefly outlined in the foregoing 
discussion, may be summed up as: (1) decrease of the meat 
supply, through the reduction of the number of farm animals 
in the country; (2) heavy exportation of beef in the years prior 
to 1906; (3) break-up of the western ranges; (4) sharp ad- 
vance in the price of corn; (5) increased cost of farm land. 

The changes to which attention has been called as affecting 
the production of meat and the price level have operated on the 
side of supply. At the same time there has been at work on 
the side of demand another factor. This is the growing tend- 
ency among all classes to demand better qualities of product. 
In the case of meat this has taken the form of an increased de- 
mand for the finer cuts. The ribs and the loins bring on the 
market half the value of the entire animal. These represent 
only about 25 per cent, of the total weight of the steer. The 
exceptional demand for the finer cuts, porterhouse, sirloin and 
rib roast, is in part due to the fact that they may be more 
readily prepared for the table by boiling or baking than the 
cheaper cuts, which require considerable skill in the prepara- 
tion, in order to make them appetizing. Lack of knowledge of 
the possibilities in the cheaper cuts on the part of the average 
housewife also comes in play here. It is a fine art to make 
good pot-pie or beef stew, or any other special preparation of 
the cheaper cuts of beef. The housewife of an earlier genera- 
tion understood this art, and was willing to take the trouble. 
Formerly, also, it used to be the practice for the housewife to 
do her own marketing, make personal selection of the cuts, and 
perhaps carry them home in a market basket. To-day, ordering 
is usually done by telephone, and the orders are delivered in 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 109 

wagons. The cost of delivering meat by wagon averages from 
2 to 5 cents per delivery. This cost has to be charged up in the 
price. All these changes on the side of demand have contrib- 
uted to advance the price of meat products. 

The question of who is to blame for the present high level of 
meat prices is a puzzling one. The evidence appears to show 
that the farmer is actually getting a lower profit on meat prod- 
ucts than he did ten years ago. The high price which he re- 
ceives is eaten up by the increased expenses of production, due 
to the higher price of corn and feeding products and the advance 
of land values. The report of the United States Bureau of 
Agriculture for 1909 declares that a farmer who has produced 
or matured beef has participated in the upward price movement 
only through the corn that he has fed, and then not fully. His 
cattle before corn feeding stand where they did in the price level 
of 1896-1900, and the best of them for beef purposes have not 
gained much. 

Public opinion generally holds the packers responsible for the 
increase of meat prices. The only official investigation of the 
packing business that has been made, however, that of the Bu- 
reau of Corporations, the results of which were presented in the 
Garfield report of 1905, showed that the packers actually lose 
money on the meat products which they get out of the animal, 
and make money only on the by-products ; that is, the profit of 
the packers is derived from the sale of the by-products, and not 
from that of the meat parts, which afford no margin of profit 
over cost of the animal and the slaughtering and packing. It 
is a fact that the remarkable development of the business of 
making by-products from meat animals during the last twenty 
years has made it possible to sell the meat at lower prices than 
would otherwise be necessary to cover the cost. If it were not 
for this business of by-products, the consumer would be paying 
still more heavily for beef at the present time. 

The ways in which parts of the animal formerly wasted are 
made to yield marketable products are almost innumerable. 
The hide is, of course, the principal by-product. Parts of the 
cheap meats and head meats are sold fresh, and others go into 
sausage and similar confections. The heads with the horns re- 
moved are manufactured into glue and fertilizer. Horns are 



110 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

used for the manufacture of novelties. The feet are utilized 
in various ways, yielding, when subjected to certain processes, 
tallow, glue, gelatine, neatsfoot oil and bonestock. The fat is a 
by-product of importance second only to the hide. The amount 
of fat derived from an animal varies widely from 20 to 140 
pounds. Formerly this was rendered into tallow; now it is 
rendered into oleo oils and oleo stearine. All internal organs ex- 
cept those that have special value go into the rendering tank and 
come out in the form of tallow. The latter product is the basis 
for soap manufacture, which has been highly developed by most 
of the packers. The intestines, bladder and so on furnish the 
casings for packing sausage. Part of the tail is used for mak- 
ing curled hair, the rest going into the rendering tanks. Heart, 
liver, brains and sweetbreads are all marketed, and blood all 
goes to the fertilizing department. 1 It is from this ingenious 
and elaborate utilization of the waste materials that the profits 
of the packers come, and not from the advance of the price of 
dressed meat. 

The so-called " beef trust " is described in Moody's " Manual 
of Corporation Securities," 1904, as " lesser industrial trust 
No. 80, composed of Armour, Morris, Swift, Cudahy, the Na- 
tional Packing Company and affiliated concerns." The number 
of plants under its control is stated to be about 56, and the total 
capitalization about $110,000,000. Since 1904 the number of 
plants and the capitalization have both increased considerably. 
The combination owns refrigerating car systems and stock yard 
companies in eight cities. It has packing plants in these cities 
and in many others. It is extremely difficult to form any esti- 
mate of the earnings of the companies, as the stock, with the 
exception of Swift & Co., is owned closely and is not upon the 
market. Swift & Co. have paid dividends of 7 per cent, an- 
nually, on a stock of $50,000,000, increased to $60,000,000 in 
January, 1909. The last treasurer's report of this company 
shows earnings of $7,600,000, after the deduction of $1,700,000 
for depreciation. This amounted to 15.2 per cent, on the $50,- 
000,000 of capital then outstanding. It cannot be questioned 
that the combination of packing companies is in a position to 

1 For an account of the by-products of the packing business, see article in Boston "Com- 
mercial," February 26, 1910. 



! 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. Ill 

control to some extent the prices of cattle on the hoof and of 
dressed meat. The various government prosecutions of recent 
years, while not resulting in convictions, show that there is 
some substance in the charges that the packers have conspired 
to control trade in the meat supply. There is no evidence, how- 
ever, that this control has been exercised to the extent of making 
prices higher than the level warranted by fair profits of the 
business. Certainly the changed conditions of the meat supply, 
and the factors affecting the demand for meat, to which attention 
has been directed in this review of the present situation, are 
amply sufficient to account for a high range of prices, without 
assuming any conspiracy to this end on the part of the packers. 
It can hardly be questioned, in any event, that the main causes 
of high meat prices are natural and economic, not artificial. 1 

Another cause of the high price of meat is found in the 
heavy expenses of distributing the product from the farm to the 
kitchen. In the passage of a quarter of beef from the source 
of supply to the consumer, various classes of middlemen step in 
to take toll all along the line. The farmer sells his beef in the 
Chicago stock yards. There it is bought either by a commission 
house, by a packer or by a feeder. The latter is another farmer, 
who buys beef on the hoof, to feed it until it reaches prime con- 
dition. When the feeder sells his fattened steer, it is often 
bought by a commission house. Next comes the packer. The 
packer distributes the beef in some instances through another 
commission house operating in a distant city, although in most 
cases this is done through the local agency or representative of 
the packers. The commission house or the packer's agency sells 
to a jobber. From the jobber the meat goes to a retailer, who 
finally brings it to the door of the consumer. The price which 
the consumer finally pays is burdened by the charges of these 
successive middlemen and by the costs for transportation and 
storage. 

It is clear that this multiplication of middlemen plays a large 
part in increasing the price of meat products. Mr. I. T. 
Pryor, in his address at the convention of the Cattle Kaisers' 
A-ociation, which has already been quoted, stated that in his 

1 For an excellent account of the beef raising and packing industry, see article by Walter C. 
Howey, "Our Beef Supply as a Great Business," in the American "Review of Reviews" for 
March, 1910. 



112 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

opinion the great army of middlemen in the United States, who 
handle in one way or another the products of the farm and of 
the live stock dealer, are responsible for the high prices of beef 
on the block : — 

Thousands of retail butchers in this country sell one-half of a beef or 
less each day, and must make sufficient profit on this small quantity to 
meet the large expenses incident to city life. The wholesale butcher is 
also under heavy expenses of a similar nature. The packers have a 
large capitalization, on which they are striving to pay dividends on 
stock and fair interest on bonds, all of which must necessarily come out 
of the pockets of the producer or consumer; more properly speaking, 
out of both. On the one hand, the packers buy as cheaply as conditions 
will warrant. On the other hand, the retail butcher sells his beef as 
high as the consumer will permit. The great problem to-day before the 
American people is to devise ways and means for the producer to reach 
the consumer with the minimum cost of handling his products. 

The opinion evidently prevails widely that the retailers have 
been exacting undne profit on meat products, through combina- 
tion or agreement in some form. This commission has not 
been able to discover evidence of any local combinations or agree- 
ments in Massachusetts. On the other hand, it is evident that 
the necessary expenses of the retail meat trade as now conducted 
are very heavy. Men must be sent for orders, and goods must 
be delivered at all times, sometimes by special trips. The large 
number of small shops alone makes the retail business highly 
expensive. When several small shops are doing the business 
that one large establishment could handle more efficiently, the 
number of horses, wagons, deliverymen, clerks and so on is mul- 
tiplied. This multiplication of expense is charged up to the 
consumer in his bill. In the city of Washington there are 3,500 
provision stores, serving 300,000 people, or 1 store for every 85 
individuals, or about every 17 families. The retail prices in 
Washington are 42 per cent, higher than the wholesale prices. 
In Boston the margin of difference between wholesale and retail 
prices, according to the results of an investigation made in 1909 
by the Bureau of Animal Industry of the Department of Agri- 
culture, is 36 per cent. ; in Holyoke it is 47 per cent. ; and in 
Springfield 23 per cent. The percentages in other large cities 
of the country are: 20, New York and Philadelphia; 17, Balti- 
more; 25, Cincinnati; 46, Chicago; 39, St. Louis. In Boston 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 113 

the rate of gross profit is twice as large for 8-cent beef as for 
beef costing 11 and 11% cents. It appears to be the general 
practice to mark up low-priced beef about twice as much rela- 
tively as high-priced beef. In other words, this large gross 
profit bears more heavily on the poorer classes than on the well- 
to-do. Among the factors that contribute to the high retail cost, 
the following are mentioned in the report of the Bureau : — 

1. Customers demand certain services that add to the expense, 
such as delivery of goods, perhaps by special trip, and taking- 
orders in advance by a man sent to the residence. 

2. The retail business is greatly overdone. The multiplica- 
tion of the small shops burdens consumers and does not benefit 
the trade in general. When the retail business of an area is 
divided among twenty or more small shops, where one large one 
would be adequate, the expenses for labor, horses, rent and other 
items in distribution are largely increased, with the result of a 
higher margin of retail over wholesale prices. 

3. Customers have developed a preference for certain cuts, 
which are usually the highest priced. About one-fifth of the 
carcass is bought at the highest price, namely : porterhouse steak, 
at 25 to 30 cents per pound; sirloin, at 20 to 25 cents; and rib 
roasts, at 20 cents. 

In his testimony before this commission, Mr. P. L. Hughes, 
representing the Cudahy Packing Company, declared that in 
Boston more meat passes through the jobbers' hands than in 
other cities. He stated : — 

There is very little jobbing now outside of Boston. Boston has a 
good percentage of jobbers yet. Q. You mean that New York doesn't 
job much meat ? A. Very little now. Q. Why does that custom still ob- 
tain here? A. Why, I don't know. They don't seem to be affected here 
like they are on other markets. I haven't known of any other place, in 
fact, where there were many middlemen, in the fourteen years I have 
been in the business, except here in Boston. This market is conducted 
a little different from any other market in the United States. It is more 
old-fashioned, a good deal like the European market in the style of cut- 
ting the meat and the style of handling it, largely through jobbers or 
middlemen. 

An attempt to estimate the profits of the retail butcher was 
made by Mr. Walter C. Howey. Results of his inquiry on this 



114 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



subject are most instructive. They are set forth in his article 
on " Our Beef Supply as a Great Business/' as follows : — 

A canvass by telegraph of the retail prices prevailing on ribs and 
loins in eight different centers on the same day brought figures that 
varied from 40 to 90 per cent. The charge of the retailer varies in 
proportion to the quality of the meat which he handles, the extent of 
his sales, the proportion of his customers who carry their purchases home 
to those who require delivery, the relative standing in society of the com- 
munity from which he draws custom, and the personal whim of the 
butcher himself. ... In order properly to compute the profits of the 
retailer, however, it is necessary to make a comparison of the cost of 
the beef to the butcher upon a specific date with the price which the 
butcher asked of the retailer upon that date. On February 8 the market 
price of No. 1 dressed beef on South Water Street, Chicago, as com- 
pared with the retail price of six representative butchers, was as fol- 
lows : — 





Weight 

in Pounds 

from Single 

Steer. 


Packers' 

Price 

per Pound 

(Cents). 


Butchers' 

Price 
per Pound 

(Cents). 


Difference 

in Retail 

Price on One 

Steer. 


Ribs 


72 


i7y 2 


22 


$3.24 


Loin, 


130 


22 


26 


5.20 


Rounds, 


180 


W* 


15 


11.70 


Chucks, 


186 


8 


13 


9.30 


Plate, 


95 


7 


10 


2.85 


Total butchers' profit on beef, 


$32.29 



When I gazed at them in amazement the butchers explained that the 
table, though mathematically correct, was not a criterion of sales or 
profits. While it was possible for them to sell the 72 pounds of rib 
roast at 22 cents and the 130 pounds of loin at 26 cents, it is absolutely 
impossible for the butchers to dispose of 180 pounds of round, 186 
pounds of chuck and 95 pounds of plate that go with the same beef. 
A portion of the cheaper cuts is sold to the retail customers. The 
remainder goes into hamburger steak, sausage meat, restaurant and 
boarding house sales at decreased figures, which barely enables the 

I\ butcher to equalize on inferior sales. This accounts for the fact that the 
| retail prices of inferior cuts of meat when bought in small quantities 
are almost double the wholesale values. Rentals, light, heat and mainte- 
nance, cost of delivery, and a business of small daily sales in comparison 
to the large sales of other retail branches of industry are the reasons given 
by the butchers for the noticeable increase in the retail prices of beef 
over wholesale figures. . . . The various elements which enter into the 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 115 

retail marketing of the product make it impossible to compute the prof- 
its of this branch of the industry with any certainty. However, it is a 
fact that the final stage through which the beefsteak passes before its 
appearance upon the breakfast table is fraught with as great expense 
as all of the other operations combined. 

The tariff has also been cited as a factor in the high price of 
meat. The present rates of duty are as follows : — 

Cattle, if less than one year old, $2 per head; all other cattle, if valued 
at not more than $14 per head, $3.75 per head; if valued at more 
than $14 per head, 27^2 per centum ad valorem. 

Swine, $1.50 per head. Bacon and hams, 4 cents per pound. 

Sheep, one year old or over, $1.50 per head; less than one year old, 75 
cents per head. 

All other live animals not specially provided for in this section, 20 per 
centum ad valorem. 

•Fresh meats, a A cent per pound. 

Meats of all kinds, prepared or preserved, not specially provided for in 
this section, 25 per centum ad valorem. 

Poultry, live, 3 cents per pound; dead, 5 cents per pound. 

It is contended that the duties prevent the importation of 
Canadian beef or Argentine beef, which otherwise could be 
brought into the country and sold at prices much lower than 
those now prevailing. On the other hand, it is argued that the 
tariff has little or no effect upon meat prices. This view is pre- 
sented in a paper read by Mr. T. W. Tomlinson, secretary of the 
American Live Stock Association, at the recent convention of the 
Cattle Raisers Association. He states : — 

Already there is a clamor for the removal of the duty on live stock, 
meat and all other food products. The comparatively small duties on 
these commodities have been purely paper duties; they have never in 
the past affected the general trend of prices at home; they were a sop 
to deceive the farmer, and. to quiet his opposition to the large and in 
many cases prohibitive duties accorded some eastern manufactured ar- 
ticle. You may rest assured that if they did have any effect on the 
prices of meat and grain there would have been a howl to remove them 
a long time ago. ... It really requires no argument to prove that so 
long as we have a surplus of grain and meat products to be sold abroad 
in the markets of the world in competition with other countries, an im- 
port tariff on such commodities cannot appreciably affect our home 
prices on grain and meat products. Stated otherwise, our exports of 
staple food articles, such as grain and meat products, in large quanti- 
ties, to the large consuming marts of the world, mean that our prices at 



116 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

home are less than they are abroad. The reverse is true of most of our 
manufactured goods, other than food products ; for it is well known and 
practically undisputed that such articles can be bought abroad cheaper 
than in the United States, owing to our highly protective system. When- 
ever this country reaches the point that it cannot produce enough grain 
and meat products to supply the domestic consumption, and importation 
becomes necessary, then, and not till then, will the tariff have any effect 
on the prices of such articles. If, with our matchless resources, that 
time ever arrives, then the rest of the world will be on a starvation diet. 
I believe that all the facts support the conclusion that in the past the 
tariff on live stock, meat, and grain food products has not affected 
prices, and will not in the future influence prices so long as we have a 
surplus for export. 

It is clear, with reference to the tariff in its bearing on beef 
and meat prices, that as prices become higher in the American 
market and the exports of meat fall off, the duties must become 
increasingly operative. Their removal would certainly give the 
American consumer access to a much wider market, and enable 
him to purchase at the cheapest sources of supply. Whether 
this removal would be expedient or justifiable, in view of its 
effects on the cattle-raising industry, is another question, that 
can be answered only after a thorough study of this aspect of the 
subject in its practical details. 

It has been asserted, furthermore, that the federal inspection 
law has contributed to the increase of the beef prices. This 
legislation is declared to be one cause of the present shortage. 
Attention is directed to the fact that before the enactment of 
the new law there were more than 900 slaughtering establish- 
ments in the United States doing an interstate business. At 
present only about 300 packers have government inspection. 
This appears to show that over 600 packers have stopped doing 
an interstate business on account of federal inspection. Mr. 
George M. Carney of the American Meat Packers Association 
advanced this contention in his testimony before the United 
States Senate Committee on Wages and Prices of Commodities. 
He declared that the withdrawal of over 600 packers from inter- 
state business, by reason of their disinclination to subject them- 
selves to federal inspection and meet the expenses necessitated 
by the reconstruction of their plants according to government 
regulations and the losses incurred through condemnation of 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 117 

live stock by inspectors, is one of the direct causes of the in- 
creased prices of meat. 

When one reflects upon the numerous factors which have been 
mentioned as influencing the prices of meat products in recent 
years, it is very easy to understand the upward movement. In- 
deed, when all the influences are taken into account, the wonder 
is not that meat prices are high, but that they have not risen 
higher. It is not necessary, in order to read the meaning of 
this phenomenon, to gaze into any mare's nest of combination, 
conspiracy and manipulation. The explanation lies ready at 
hand in the multiplicity of natural and economic factors that 
have all combined to increase the cost of producing and distribut- 
ing the meat supply. It is evident, furthermore, that the main 
causes of the present high prices must continue in the future to 
operate to advance the cost of meat to the consumer in even 
greater degree than has already taken place. A searching sur- 
vey of the present situation discloses no hope or prospect of a 
permanent return to a lower level of meat prices. There will 
doubtless be fluctuations of prices, but recession can be only tem- 
porary. In the long run the price level may be expected to rise 
rather than fall. The only legislative measure of relief that 
could be applied is removal or reduction of the duties on meat 
products. It is doubtful if even this would afford any appre- 
ciable or lasting relief from high prices. It seems probable 
that the importation of beef from Canada, Argentina and other 
countries, which would be promoted by removal of the duties, 
would operate in the long run to prevent extreme fluctuations 
of prices rather than to establish a permanently lower level 
of prices in general. The prediction of the Hon. S. H. Cowan, 
in his testimony before the United States Commission on 
Wages and Prices of Commodities, appears to be well grounded. 
" There is," he declared, " no use for the people of the United 
States to think of ever getting any more cheap beef." 

It may be pointed out, however, that a better organization 
of distributing agencies, designed to eliminate unnecessary ex- 
penses in getting meat products from the farm to the home, 
would make prices lower. Also, more intelligent and economi- 
cal methods of marketing and preparing meat for consumption 
in the household would help appreciably to reduce the expendi- 



118 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

ture for meats in the average family. Practical advice on this 
point is given in a recent publication of the United States De- 
partment of Agriculture, on " Economical Use of Meat in the 
Home/' as follows : — 

The expense for meat in the home may be reduced in several ways, 
and each housekeeper can best judge which to use in her own case. 
From a careful consideration of the subject it appears that the various 
suggestions which have been made on the subject may be grouped under 
the following general heads : economy in selection and purchase, so as to 
take advantage of varying market conditions ; purchasing meat in whole- 
sale quantities for home use ; serving smaller portions of meat than usual, 
or using meat less frequently ; careful attention to the use of meat, bone, 
fat and small portions commonly trimmed off and thrown away, and the 
utilization of left-over portions of cooked meat; and the use of less ex- 
pensive kinds. 

In towns where there is opportunity for choice, it may sometimes 
be found more satisfactory not to give all the family trade to one 
butcher; by going to various markets before buying, the housekeeper 
is in a better position to hear of variations in prices and so be in 
a position to get the best values. Ordering by telephone or from the 
butcher's boy at the door may be less economical than going to market 
in person, as the range of choice and prices is of course more obvious 
when the purchaser sees the goods and has a chance to observe market 
conditions. Each housekeeper must decide for herself whether or not 
the greater convenience compensates for the smaller range of choice 
which such ordering from description entails. 

By buying in large quantities under certain conditions it may be 
possible to procure meat at better prices than those which ordinarily 
prevail in the retail market. The whole side or quarter of an animal 
can frequently be obtained at noticeably less cost per pound than when 
it is bought cut by cut, and can be used to advantage when the house- 
keeper understands the art, and has proper storage facilities and a 
good-sized family. 

2. Fish. 
While the quantity of fish handled in the Boston market has 
very greatly increased within the past ten years, it is the testi- 
mony of the dealers that the price has not materially increased. 
The price of fish depends altogether upon the supply and de- 
mand at the particular moment each day when the market opens. 
If the weather, which is the chief factor to be considered, is 
good, and the bait, which is necessary for nine-tenths of the fish- 
ing in Massachusetts, is plenty, fish are invariably cheap at 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 119 

wholesale. Bad weather and scarcity of bait bring about high 
prices. 

According to Marshall F. Blanchard, president of the T 
wharf corporation, the advance in price on the common grades 
of fish in ten years has not exceeded % or % a cent a pound. 
It is impossible to compare one year with another, owing to 
the difference in weather conditions. He stated to this commis- 
sion : — 

We are anxious to have medium prices. It is a bad handicap to have 
high prices- in the fish business, as when prices are high there is no 
margin for either the wholesaler or the retailer. I can cite cases away 
back in January when haddock sold at 5 or 10 cents per pound. The 
retailer couldn't make any money, and I am sure the wholesaler didn't 
make any; and it must be apparent to you that it takes more capital to 
do business on a five or six dollar basis than it does on a three or 
three and a half basis. In the past three years the prices have averaged 
higher, owing to the increased demand. 

While fish are among the cheapest of food products, the con- 
sumption varies but little, as fish are eaten on the average but 
once a week. During the recent meat boycott the consumption 
of fish increased, but it has now dropped back to a normal level. 
People are accustomed to pay a certain price, and they will not 
pay much of an increase. Maurice P. Shaw, manager of 
the Booth Fishing Company of Boston, states that dealers are 
governed largely by consideration of what the customer will 
stand. The entrance of the department stores into the fish busi- 
ness is stated by this witness to have had the effect of lowering 
the price to consumers. 

These large department stores make a special line of fish Wednesdays 
and Fridays, and that has enabled the working people to get their fish 
cheaper. If you notice, in any large town where they make a special 
display of fish one day in the week, their prices are invariably lower 
than those of the man who makes a business of handling fish altogether. 

It appears that the tariff does not affect the fish handled in 
Boston, with the exception of smelts and herring in the winter 
season. There is no tariff on shellfish, so that lobsters from the 
Provinces, which now furnish Boston the only source of supply, 
are not dutiable. As to the fish from the northwest, practically 



120 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



all those coming to this market are American-caught, and are 
shipped bond-free from Vancouver. In the opinion of Mr. 
Shaw, the tariff does not give American fishermen in the north- 
west any monopoly on such fish as halibut. As to the duty on 
herring and smelts, Mr. Shaw stated that in his opinion it 
worked a hardship upon the poor people, who eat them largely 
because of their cheapness. He expressed the opinion that if 
the suggested ad valorem duty on salmon is applied, it will stop 
that fish from coming into the market at all. Practically all 
the eastern salmon comes now from the Provinces. 

Mr. Blanchard declared that there is no combination in the 
fish business, and the margin of profit is very small. The 
catches are sold mostly at auction, and when prices are low, ow- 
ing to an over-supply, there is a very keen competition to get rid 
of them. In that case large numbers are cut up and salted. 

Figures obtained from the Boston market show that 60 per 
cent, of the fish sold in that market come from Boston boats, 30 
per cent, from Canada and other parts of this coast, and the re- 
maining 10 per cent, from the Pacific coast. As to the dis- 
tribution, about 70 per cent, remains in greater Boston, 23 per 
cent, elsewhere in Massachusetts, and the remaining 7 per cent. 
is sent into the New England and central States. 

Prom the United States Bureau of Fisheries Returns the fol- 
lowing figures have been obtained : — 





Receipts of Fresh Fish at Boston, landed Direct from 


Fleet. 


Yeah. 


Arrivals. 


Total Pounds. 


Average Pounds 
per Arrival. 


1903, 




3,818 


80,266,872 


21,023 


1904, 




4,056 


82,094,166 
101,306,695 


20,240 


1905, 




4,280 


23,670 


1906, 




4,505 


89,693,370 


19,910 


1907, 




4,383 


88,111,036 


20,103 


1908, 




4,500 


91,877,580 


20,417 







1910." 



HOUSE— No. 1750. 



121 







Fishery Products landed at Gloucester, Mass. 




Year. 


Number of 
Trips. 


Grand 

Total Pounds 

landed. 


Total Value. 


Average 

Pounds per 

Trip. 


1899, . 

1900, . 

1901, . 

1902, . 

1903, . 

1904, . 

1905, . 

1906, . 

1907, . 

1908, . 

1909, . 












3,954 
3,782 
3,561 
3,353 
3,172 
2,472 
2,620 
2,401 
2,702 
2,067 
1,508 


112,049,572 
95,398,009 
92,173,060 
88,980,879 
77,225,470 
89,072,194 

103,581,155 
80,707,840 

103,460,416 
85,805,567 
80,526,574 


$2,765,306 
2,786,596 
2,674,551 
2,336,444 
2,378,904 
2,234,757 
2,467,529 
1,955,038 
2,591,790 
2,064,415 
2,103,476 


28,338 
25,224 
25,884 
26,538 
24,661 
36,032 
39,535 
33,614 
38,290 
41,512 
53,400 



3. Poultry. 
Poultry products in general are exceptionally high at the 
present time, and have apparently shown a tendency to increase 
in price, although subject to wide fluctuations. Massachusetts 
products, however, meet the competition of almost all parts of 
the country, and such competition has an important influence 
upon prices. In certain sections of the State the poultry in- 
dustry is already highly developed. It is found, however, only 
reasonably profitable; it is not a means of acquiring great 
wealth. At much lower prices the industry will cease to grow, 
and the cost of living is not likely to be reduced through an ex- 
tension of the poultry industry. The rise in the price of poul- 
try is due largely to the high price of feed. The boycotts on 
beef, furthermore, have increased the demand for poultry. One 
dealer states : — 



Any one who would take the trouble to go through the great west, 
where the bulk of the poultry comes from, would find that the farmers 
would declare that they can afford to eat their poultry and sell their 
hogs and their cattle; and they kill off quite a good many of them on 
account of the scarcity of feed, so that there has not been a sufficient 
quantity to supply the markets with poultry. A great many people 
began eating poultry at the time they first started in the east the boycott 
on meat four or five years ago, and they found it was a fine substitute, 



122 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

and they have kept it up. This has created a greater demand for poul- 
try, because so many more people have eaten poultry than previous to 
that time. There is no one concern that controls the situation in the 
west. There are packers in almost every town of any size in all the 
great west who dress the poultry and ship it to the east, or ship it alive. 

About 20 per cent, of the poultry handled in the Boston mar- 
ket is raised in New England. Of the Boston supply, 75 per 
cent, is consumed within greater Boston, 10 per cent, goes out- 
side into the State, and but 15 per cent, is sent out of the State. 

The poultry dealers attribute the present high prices to the 
shortage that has prevailed for about eight months, which, 
they claim, is due to the high price of grain. When grain is 
high, poultry is killed. The first result is to glut the market 
and reduce the prices. Then follows a period of scarcity, which 
brings high prices, and then every one who has a back yard be- 
gins to raise chickens. By this process the supply is increased 
and the prices drop. The present new crop will be marketed 
after September 1, and then it is thought that lower prices may 
be expected for a time. For this reason not so much poultry has 
been frozen this year as formerly. 

The tendency to produce the finest grades in New England is 
noticeable in poultry raising, as in other industries. One firm 
here sends from $500 to $2,400 worth a month to a large concern 
in New York City. For example, 50 pairs of broilers, weighing 
210 pounds, were sent to this New York concern recently, and 
the price paid was 53 cents a pound. This order was filled from 
a lot brought that morning very early from Westport near New 
Bedford. The owner came with them, and received 50 cents a 
pound. 

The decentralizing movement mentioned in the case of meats 
is noticeable to some extent in the poultry business. When the 
packers make up a load of meats for their branch houses, they 
are very apt to fill out the load with poultry, thereby depriving 
the Boston jobbers of just so much business. 

The agents of the steamship companies running to Maine and 
the Provinces claim that they could ordinarily buy poultry 
cheaper in the Provinces than here, were it not for the tariff, 
which is prohibitive. The steward of one of these boats said 
that he could buy fowls in Yarmouth about 4 cents a pound 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 123 

cheaper than here. On the other hand, an investigator found 
only one pair of chickens in the St. Johns market in the second 
week of April; and it would seem that, if it were not for the 
Canadian tariff, we could sell them poultry when we had a 
surplus. 

4. Butter. 

It has been picturesquely asserted that the price of butter in 
eastern markets is controlled arbitrarily by a group of gentlemen 
who meet around a table each Monday in Elgin, 111. This 
body, the quotation committee of the Board of Trade of that 
city, fixes the Elgin price, and the latter is said to determine 
the prices charged by dealers elsewhere throughout the country. 
Various dealers who appeared before the United States Senate 
Committee on Wages and Prices of Commodities declared that 
the Elgin price absolutely fixes the price at other markets in the 
country. Wallace L. Pierce of the S. S. Pierce Company of 
Boston said that the Elgin price very materially affected the 
Boston market. As he expressed it, " The butter market is 
supported every day." 

On the other hand, testimony was presented before the United 
States Senate committee and the Massachusetts commission to 
the effect that butter prices in eastern markets are not controlled 
by the Elgin quotations. Eor example, Mr. Charles H. Earns- 
worth of Boston stated to this commission that the Elgin price 
does not fix the price in any large measure here. He said that 
he had seen the Boston market a cent over, and at other times a 
cent under, the Elgin price, and that unless under contract the 
butter sold here was not confined to the Elgin price. Accord- 
ing to the testimony of President John Newman of the Board 
of Trade of Elgin, 111., before the Senate committee, Boston is 
one of the three or four so-called permanent markets from which 
that organization gets figures upon which to base its prices for 
butter. 

About 30 per cent, of the butter sold in the Boston market 
is produced in Xew England. While a large quantity of fresh 
butter is used in Boston, a very large proportion sold during the 
winter season is storage butter. 

The prices of all kinds have been higher the past year than 
in the preceding year. The light corn and hay crops in the 



124 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

west in 1908 are responsible for the shortage which brought this 
about, according to expert testimony. 

As a result, in the last year or two cattle, especially in 1909, 
came into the market lean and thin in the month of April, and 
dealers did not get butter in the usual flow until along in June. 
They did not get the usual May results, either. The outcome 
of the whole season's business was affected by the poor condition 
of the cattle in the spring. The height of the butter season, it 
should be remarked, is in the summer; nature provides the 
largest yield in June, July and August. 

In spite of the shortage and the consequent increase in prices, 
dealers declare that profits on butter have been smaller than 
usual. Mr. Farnsworth states : — 

Butter went into the storages at a cost of 27 cents and perhaps as 
high as 30 cents, and in the fall it went in at 30 cents and 31 cents, we 
will say. That butter has been selling on the market at an average of 
29 cents to 32 cents a pound. The condition of the market has been 
what we call stagnant, not active at all. There have been some substi- 
tutions on account of the high prices, but as a matter of fact the retail 
stores around Boston and in the other cities in this and surrounding 
States have been retailing storage butter all winter at 32 cents to 34 
cents. Now, of course, there have been higher prices on fresh butter, 
but that is only a small item in Boston during the winter. Some of 
this butter comes from Vermont and a little from New York State. 
People who require fresh butter want it, and such people are willing 
to pay for it. The average price on that has been 40 cents during the 
winter, and now it is selling at 38 cents. I think there were a couple 
of weeks when the market was up to 43 cents at retail. That is an 
extreme price, while the other butter had not exceeded 34 cents at any 
time, in my judgment. 

The centralizing of the cream industry is another factor in 
the butter market which has made its influence felt during the 
last decade. The tendency toward centralization is especially 
evident in the west. It is stated, however, that the butter made 
in the centralized plants is inferior to the product of the farmers' 
creameries. Mr. Farnsworth says : — 

There is a disposition in the west country to centralize its cream. In 
other words, a company would be formed to go out through the central 
roads and gather in the cream and bring it into the central town and 
make it into butter for distribution from this centralized plant; but so 



1910.J HOUSE — No. 1750. 125 

far as my knowledge goes, they never yet have been able to produce a 
grade of goods that would compare with the local creameries that are 
handled by the farmers. Usually there is a difference in price of say 
1 cent a pound in the two grades, due to difference in quality. They 
cannot make the same grade of butter, because the cream comes from 
such long distances that when they amalgamate it they do not get such 
results. 

Another factor in shortening the supply of butter is the con- 
densed milk trade, which is paying such high prices for milk 
as to take much of it throughout New England from the pro- 
duction of butter. Wallace L. Pierce told the congressional com- 
mittee that the large consumption of cream had much to do with 
the price of butter. 

Regarding the future of the butter supply and butter prices, 
it may be pointed out that the growth of the urban population 
creates a constantly increasing market for milk. This tends to 
reduce the amount of milk available for manufacture into butter. 
The production of butter in the State has been declining for a 
number of years, and apparently must continue to decline. It 
is true the present price is high, but butter is a product which 
will permit distant transportation, and the butter locally pro- 
duced must therefore meet heavy outside competition. We 
can hardly expect an increase, therefore, in the local production 
of butter, and it is not believed that anything which can be done 
to stimulate the local butter production can affect the cost of 
living. 

5. Milk. 

The controversy between producers and dealers, which reached 
an acute stage at the end of April, could not be investigated by 
the commission, on account of the requirement imposed by the 
Legislature that its report should be presented not later than 
May 1. 

The advance in the price of milk in the last ten years by the 
producer ranges around 1 cent a quart, or about 31 per cent. 
The high prices of feed are undoubtedly the direct factor in 
the advance of milk prices. The cost of production is stated 
by Mr. Fred L. Fisher of Norwood, Mass., to have increased 46 
per cent. As he puts it, the cost of material going into milk 
to-day is 15 per cent, over what the producer is getting for it. 



126 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

He states that cows which could be bought in 1901 for from 
$40 to $50 are to-day bringing from $60 to $80, according to 
their quality. As there are more A ISTo. 1 cows sold to-day for 
$70 and over than for less than that figure, he estimates the 
stock increase at 50 per cent. 

The advance of the price of milk is attributed by Mr. Wil- 
liam A. Graustein of the Boston Dairy Company to the scientific 
crusade for farm sanitation and pure milk, which, in his opinion, 
has been conducted by unwise methods and carried to extreme 
lengths. The effect, he asserts, has been to diminish greatly the 
stock of milch cows and the supply of milk. In his testimony 
before the commission he said : — 

About five years ago the scientists discovered bacteria in milk. Im- 
mediately the facts were given to the people, who, not knowing what 
these bacteria might be, became frightened at the thought of having so 
many live bugs in their milk, and were thus led to think that milk in 
general was dangerous. Thus there arose among the people, the scien- 
tific men and boards of health, an agitation for a pure milk supply. 
This was' all very well; without doubt any improvement in the raising 
and handling and delivering of the milk would have been a good thing. 

But Mr. Graustein criticizes the methods adopted in the cru- 
sade as needlessly destructive. He submits figures, as fol- 
lows : — 

The difference in the number of cattle raised and sold to the slaughter- 
houses of New England in 1906, when the agitation started, and in 
1909, is as follows : — 
116,000 fewer hogs. 

59,000 fewer beef cattle. 

14,000 fewer veal calves. 

11,000 fewer sheep. 

93,000 fewer hogs raised and killed for the farmer's own use. 



293,000 fewer animals in 1909 than in 1906. 

At a low estimate, this decrease is equal to 85,000,000 pounds of meat. 

In addition, there was a reduction of 37,000 milch cows. I find from 
statistics that there has been a corresponding decrease in the territory 
producing milk for densely populated centers, which territory consists 
of about 60 per cent, of the total United States area. New England is 
3 per cent, of the total United States area, or one-twentieth of this terri- 
tory, and contains 195,000 farms, or 2.97 per cent, of all the farms in 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 127 

the United States. Thus the total decrease in the United States is esti- 
mated as 1,700,000,000 pounds, or enough to feed 12,000,000 people for 
a year. If the increase in population during the four years was 
5,000,000, we produced meat for 17,000,000 less people in 1909 than in 
1906, and had 740,000 fewer milch cows. 

While not so large a factor here as in the west, it is claimed 
further by some dealers that the increased demand for beef has 
affected the price of milk to some degree in all the eastern 
States. 

As for the future of the milk supply, the prospect is that 
prices will go still higher. The increase in price to the farmer 
to date hardly equals the increased cost of production due to the 
high prices which the farmer pays for feeds. The fact that the 
number of cows kept in the State is decreasing shows that pres- 
ent prices are not satisfactorily profitable. When the build- 
ings on a dairy farm are burned, they are seldom rebuilt, even in 
our best dairy districts. Undoubtedly the enforcement of board 
of health regulations has had some influence in increasing the 
cost of production. Prof. Wm. P. Brooks of the State Agri- 
cultural College says : — 

I do not see how it is possible that milk shall be produced in the State 
at lower prices than at present. I believe, on the contrary, that prices 
must increase, or the business will continue to decline. 

6. Eggs. 
The price of eggs at the present time is approximately 25 per 
cent, higher than in 1897. During the last year the price is 
said by dealers to have averaged higher than during any pre- 
ceding twelve months. The average ISTew York wholesale price 
in 1909 for fresh-gathered firsts was 25.03 cents ; in 1908 it was 
22.19 cents. The average Boston wholesale price in 1909 was 
25 cents; in 1908 it was 22.7 cents. The reason for the high 
price of 1909 was the severe cold weather of the early spring, 
which reduced the normal supply. Mr. Alfred P. Lee of 
Boston told the commission : — 

The only thing that saved dealers from a severe loss on eggs was an 
act of God and the elements that brought severe cold weather just 
about the time when the pullets commenced to lay, and froze them up 



128 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

so they did not lay. That gave us a chance to work out some of the 
eggs that we had in cold storage, at a price that barely let us out whole. 

The Boston market is very largely supplied from sources out- 
side of New England. At the present time only 15 per cent, 
of the eggs sold in Boston are raised in New England States. 
On the other hand, the Boston market distributes a considerable 
supply of eggs to various parts of New England. The State 
Normal School at Plymouth, N. EL, for example, reports that 
it gets its eggs and butter from Boston, and the University of 
Maine at Orono buys its eggs in Boston. 

Regarding the comparative quality of fresh-laid eggs and 
western eggs, which retailed for 4 cents a dozen less, Mr. Alfred 
P. Lee maintains that the western eggs, shipped in refrigerator 
cars and only four or five days on the road, are exactly as nutri- 
tious as the eggs raised from local sources. He said: — 

I eat western eggs; thousands of people do here. I will take a dozen 
out of a case that are all brown and put them with a dozen eggs from 
Maine that are all brown, and shake them all up and roll them around, 
and give them to you, and you can eat them, and I do not think you 
will see any difference in the taste. But there is no question that 
near-by eggs bring more money. 

With regard to the quality of cold-storage eggs, it is main- 
tained by Mr. George H. Stoddard, treasurer of the Quincy 
Market Cold Storage Company, that the eggs kept in storage 
from six to nine months are actually of better quality and much 
fuller than fresh eggs laid in the fall. He stated : — 

The very best egg is the first egg laid by the young pullet in the 
spring. That is the egg that keeps better. We mean never to store the 
summer eggs. If they do store them, they take them out first and keep 
the March and April eggs for the longest carry. Very few people 
know that the eggs that are stored in March, April and May are 
better eggs in December than the eggs that come in October or in the 
late summer. 

A census taken by " Farm and Home " for its " Poultry An- 
nual " of 1910 gave the following results in comparison with the 
United States census figures of 1900: — 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



129 



Totals for the United States. 



January, 1910. 


June, 1900. 


Increase 
(Per Cent.). 


Number of fowls on hand, 


275,500,000 


233,500,000 


18 


Value of all poultry on hand, .... 


$136,900,000 


$85,900,000 


59 


Value of poultry raised in previous year, . 


$211,900,000 


$136,400,000 


55 


Dozens eggs produced in previous year, 


1,405,800,000 


1,293,300,000 


9 


Value of eggs produced in previous year, . 


§307,400,000 


$143,600,000 


117 





This computation makes the total hen product of the United 
States for the last year $519,000,000, or nearly double the 
total of ten years ago. These are wholesale values to producers ; 
what consumers actually pay is much more. 

The gross value of the poultry products during the year 1909 
was $1.88 for each fowl on hand at the close of year, compared 
with $1.20 for the year 1899. While the number of fowls on hand 
is now about one-fifth greater than ten years ago, their value 
shows an increase of 59 per cent. The value of all poultry 
raised last year shows about the same rate of gain over 1899. 
The value per hen for the whole United States is now close to 
50 cents, as against 37 cents ten years ago. Eggs show an aver- 
age value at the farm or hennery for the past year of 20 cents 
a dozen, compared with only 11 cents for the census year 1899. 
The eggs produced last year had a farm value equal to $3.82 
for every man, woman and child in the United States. The 
value of the poultry raised last year averaged $2.37 per capita 
of the total population. 



7. Vegetables. 

In respect to vegetables, Massachusetts and New England 
are far more nearly self -supplying than in the case of other com- 
modities that constitute the food supply. By far the greater 
part of the vegetable supply of the Boston market is grown 
either within the confines of New England or no farther off than 
New York State. The remainder comes chiefly from the south 
Atlantic States, from Florida to New Jersey. 

As to prices, the evidence submitted to this commission is 
that they have not advanced on the whole in the past ten years, 



130 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

although in some years certain vegetables have varied widely, 
according to the crops. Potatoes are much lower this year than 
in 1909, by reason of a heavy increase of the crop throughout 
the country. One year ago at this time potatoes were very 
high, readily selling at $1 per bushel or more. At that time 
they were coming into our markets from various parts of the 
United States and even from Europe. At the present time the 
farm price of potatoes in most sections is 50 cents per bushel, 
or less. In other words, the price to the farmer this year is 
hardly one-half what it was last year. This wide difference is 
due to the fact that the crops of the country this year were ex- 
ceptionally large. Cabbages also are cheaper this year than 
last. The crop of 1908 left the farmers' hands at good prices, 
in many cases at $25 to $30 per ton in the fall, but the crop 
of 1909 could hardly be sold for more than $5 to $10 per ton 
in the fall, and the price even at the present time is low. . Cran- 
berries, too, are low. The crop of 1908 sold at high prices ; 
$12 to $15 per barrel were realized by growers in February in 
1909. The crop of 1909, on the other hand, has sold from the 
first at very low prices. Even at the present time it takes ex- 
ceptionally good fruit to bring as much as $5 per barrel in the 
large city markets. 

On the other hand, squashes and onions have risen in price. 
The squash crop of 1908 brought very low prices, in some sec- 
tions only $8 to $12 per ton. The crop of the past season sold 
readily in the autumn at prices ranging from $20 to $30. These 
figures are sufficiently high to make the crop very profitable. In 
the case, however, of this crop, western competition is a large 
factor in fixing prices. The price realized for the onion crop 
of 1908 was in general low. The price for the last season aver- 
aged much better, although 35 cents and 40 cents per bushel 
were paid in many cases last fall. At the present time the 
farm price is very satisfactory, and has been so since early in 
January, ranging the greater part of the time from about 60 
cents to 75 cents. The fluctuations from year to year in the 
prices realized by the farmers for this crop are enormous. The 
local crop is relatively of sufficient importance to have consid- 
erable influence upon prices, but local growers have to meet 
the competition of New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and to some 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 131 

extent of yet more distant parts of the country. The high 
prices of this year are in large measure due to the fact that the 
product from the States named was small. 

S. Groceries. 

The general tendency of prices has been upward in recent 
years, although the advance has by no means been so marked as 
in the case of other classes of food products. It is to be ob- 
served, also, that in the case of canned goods and cereals, while 
the prices may not have advanced appreciably, the sizes of pack- 
ages have been reduced. This means, of course, a practical in- 
crease of prices to the consumer, since he gets less for his money. 
Mr. Fred L. Hiller, manager of the Tremont Street store of 
the S. S. Pierce Company of Boston, told the commission that 
groceries of all kinds had risen during the past three or four 
years steadily but gradually. 

This statement, however, must be qualified by certain excep- 
tions. Some important goods in the grocery class have either 
fallen in price or remained stationery. Tea has fallen. Coffee 
has not advanced for several years, and the variation for a con- 
siderable period has not been over half a cent at a time. Mr. 
Benjamin S. Palmer of the Chase & Sanborn Company stated 
concerning the prices of coffee and tea : — 

There was in the history of the business away back in the 80's a very 
rapid advance in the Rio grades from about 5 or 6 cents up to 20. 
All coffee felt it in comparison, although they did not advance as the 
Rios did. Then came a series of years when they gradually came 
down, and they finally came down to a basis of the standards, to about 
7 cents, somewhere around there. That is the standard. You cannot 
buy an article that would be used at that price, but that is the Rio 
standard, as you will see it quoted from time to time. Quotations fluc- 
tuate on the Exchange, but as far as the price of tea and coffee is con- 
cerned to the dealer or the retailer, there has been no advance. In 
fact, in a general way, the consumer can obtain to-day a better quality 
of goods for the same price than he could in times gone by. 

Sugar, which is an extremely important item in the family 
budget, representing 5.5 per cent, of the total expenditure for 
food, has changed little in retail price during the last decade. 



132 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Mr. Hiller stated that sugar had fluctuated from 5 to 6 cents, 
5 to 5% and 6, then back to 5%. The retail price bears little 
relation to the wholesale price. Few grocers make anything 
on sugar. Many sell it at a loss. 

Flour has advanced about 30 per cent, in price since 1897. 
The cause is the increase of the price of wheat. The average 
price of flour in 1897 in this State was $5.80 a barrel; at the 
present time it is $7.50. In 1893 flour was selling at $4.50 a 
barrel. The price in that year was abnormally low, on account 
of the general depression throughout the country and the great 
drop in the price of wheat. The consumption of flour has in- 
creased greatly, as the prices of food stuffs have advanced. Mr. 
Bernard J. Rothwell remarks : — 

When you are endeavoring to make both ends meet, the consumption 
of flour increases; and there is somewhat of a paradox that good 
times in general manufactures very often have made unsatisfactory 
conditions in the milling business, and vice versa; because, when people 
are driven to economize, the use of flour automatically increases, and 
the milling industry profits by this. 

Mr. Rothwell is also of the opinion that speculation is an im- 
portant factor in determining the price of flour. Concerning 
this matter he says : — 

The constant trading in wheat in Chicago and other speculative 
centers, whereby the entire crop of the country is sold over and over 
again during the year, is a very serious detriment. Bearing upon that 
in the same line is the increased policy of the farmer to hold his 
wheat, so that to-day the farmers throughout the west hold back a 
larger proportion of the wheat than they formerly did. There is not 
the same rush to market immediately after harvest that formerly 
occurred. The effect of that is, that the same large stocks are not 
carried in elevators at central points like Chicago, Minneapolis and 
Duluth, where in time gone by we have had a visible supply of per- 
haps 75,000,000 bushels. The visible supply at present is something 
over 1,000,000. The total stock in Chicago available for speculation 
purposes — it has to be of a certain grade, No. 1, No. 2 red winter 
— is probably not exceeding 4,000,000 bushels, and in Minneapolis 
I imagine the total stock available for speculating purposes is not 
over three or four million. . . . Now, an important matter in the regu- 
lation of the cost of flour would certainly be the regulation of specula- 
tion in the great speculative centers. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 133 

While flour has risen greatly in price, bread sold by the loaf 
Las not increased nominally. The weight of the loaf, how- 
ever, has been diminished ; this means an advance in actual price 
to the consumer. 

9. Recommendation concerning the Boston Market 

District. 

The prosperity and efficiency of the market district of Boston 
vitally concerns the welfare not only of Boston and the metro- 
politan district, but also of the Commonwealth, because Boston 
has become both the entrepot and distributing center of the 
busiest and most populous parts of New England. The dis- 
trict has greatly enlarged its borders and extended its influence 
and the variety and volume of its business since the epoch-mak- 
ing improvements accomplished by the city government of 
Boston more than three-quarters of a century ago. But the 
development of the usefulness of the district has been retarded 
because it has not been provided with modern appliances and 
facilities for the prompt and economical handling of the ever- 
increasing streams of incoming and outgoing commodities. The 
lack of a comprehensive and progressive policy for the develop- 
ment of the market district after modern methods constitutes 
a considerable factor in the needless expense of the necessaries 
of life to the millions of ultimate consumers who depend upon 
the Boston market district for their supplies. 

Therefore, the commission holds that there is immediate and 
urgent need of a comprehensive study of the conditions which 
obtain in the Boston market district, for the purpose of deter- 
mining what measures are requisite and feasible to enable the 
commission and jobbing houses within the district and the 
lessees in the two markethouses to render satisfactory and effi- 
cient service to the consuming public. 

It is the opinion of the commission that the interests of all 
concerned would be best subserved by the creation of a mixed 
Commission on Market Improvements, in which the city govern- 
ment of Boston, the Commonwealth, the commercial bodies and 
the marketmen of Boston should be equitably represented. 



134 COST OF LIVING. [May, 



B. RENTS. 

Rent is one of the large factors in the cost of living, vitally 
concerning more than 80 per cent, of the families in our State, 
and averaging to represent about 20 per cent, of the entire ex- 
penditure of these families. Recent investigations have shown 
that the classes having the smallest incomes have the largest 
proportional expenditure for rents. Thus, not only is rent one 
of the largest items in the family budget, but its weight falls 
heaviest on those whose incomes are least able to bear this 
burden. 

The commission has made a study of the rentals of the class 
of dwellings and tenements commonly occupied by working- 
men's families in Boston and suburbs, Lynn, Lawrence, Lowell, 
Brockton, Fall River, Chicopee, Springfield and various towns. 
Some attention has also been given to mercantile rents. The 
special investigator who gathered information on this subject 
sums up his general conclusions as follows : — 

Rents throughout Massachusetts have increased very ma- 
terially during the past fifteen years. This upward movement 
has not, however, kept pace with the increase in the general 
cost of living. Rents respond more slowly to changed condi- 
tions than do many of the commodities of life, for the follow- 
ing reasons : — 

1. The inability of the landlord to raise the rent at will; 
he must take into consideration the possibility of collecting the 
higher rent. 

2. The force of custom; this affects rents more powerfully 
than prices. 

3. The impossibility of combination for the control of rents ; 
there is little opportunity for concerted action. 

4. The absence of a fixed standard by which to gauge rents ; 
in this respect rents differ from most of the commodities. 

5. The lack of widespread knowledge of what rents are be- 
ing charged ; we can find no rent quotations in the daily papers. 

The increase in rents is due largely to the following causes : — 

1. The increased cost of building materials. 

2. The increased cost of labor. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 135 

3. Higher standards of construction, fixed by more stringent 
building laws. 

4. General demand for conveniences which a few years ago 
were luxuries. 

Conditions in Boston. — One of the largest real estate firms in 
Boston states very positively that there has been practically no 
increase in the price of suites renting for less than $18 or $20 
per month. Those renting for over $20 in 1901 have risen 
about 20 per cent., but these apartments are steam-heated, have 
open plumbing in many cases, as well as more light and ventila- 
tion. The books of this firm show the following rents in six 
low-priced suites, taken at random : — 





Rent in 


1901. 


Rent 


IN 


1910. 


$12.00 per 


month. 


$10.00 per 


month. 


10.00 " 


" 


10.00 


" 


" 


13.50 " 


" 


13.50 


" 


" 


14.00 " 


" 


14.50 


" 


" 


13.50 " 


" 


13.50 


" 


•« 


13.50 " 


" 


14.00 


" 


" 





The average rent in South Boston has increased very little, 
if at all, since 1897; in fact, the large majority of persons giv- 
ing information about real estate conditions in this district 
state that in many cases the rent is lower. A well-posted real 
estate dealer declares that the prevailing rents in South Boston 
have not materially changed since 1897. They are certainly not 
higher. It might, however, be said that there are fewer vacant 
tenements now than formerly. These conditions can be ac- 
counted for by the fact that very few new buildings have been 
built in this section. Many old houses have been reconstructed, 
and the tenant is certainly better housed than formerly. Many 
of these renovated houses have water-closets on each floor ; more 
or less modern plumbing has been put in; the piping of old 
houses for gas is more general. In the newer houses, baths, set 
tubs and ranges are also established. . An excellent flat of five 
rooms and a bath, with hot and cold water fixtures, range, set 



136 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

tubs and gas, in a building for three families only, separated ten 
feet on each side from the nearest house, can now be rented at 
$17 to $18 per month. Fifteen years ago it would have cost 
at least $20 for the same accommodations. 

It is a noticeable fact that fewer workingmen in South Boston 
are inclined to buy homes, especially one-family houses, than 
was the case twenty years ago. When they do buy, they usually 
purchase a three-family house, and pay only a small amount 
down. In former years, the emigrant, especially if from Ire- 
land, having no chance to hold real estate in his own country, 
was anxious to buy a little home, and would purchase a small 
one-family house at first, and after he had paid the mortgage 
on that, would add to his holdings by buying for investment a 
two-family or three-family house, and still live in his modest 
home. The children of these sturdy men are not buying houses 
in any such degree. They often rent tenements beyond their 
means, buy furniture on installments, and attempt to provide 
for emergencies by weekly payments of industrial insurance, 
rather than by saving anything. The result is that they have 
extreme difficulty in meeting their rents. This method of living 
is not conducive to the purchase of homes, and is said to be one 
of the reasons for the present dullness in the real estate market. 
As one man puts it : — 

The working people of to-day demand, and perhaps are justified in 
demanding, better food, clothing and habitation than their employers 
had thirty or forty years ago. In the matter of real estate, the old- 
fashioned tenement-house property, which paid a large net income 
twenty-five to forty years ago, is a thing of the past. It could not 
be let now, nor would its condition be tolerated by the Board of 
Health. In respect to housings, the workingman is unquestionably 
much better off than he was fifteen years ago. 

In regard to rents in the North and West Ends, conflicting 
statements are made by those who are conversant with tenement 
conditions. There seems, however, to have been a considerable 
increase in rents in this section, some placing it as high as 25 
per cent. The special investigator of the 1915 committee on 
tenement-house conditions states that in many cases the land is 
so valuable that " rents must be high to bring even a moderate 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 137 

return on the investment. It is so valuable that it would be 
used only for business purposes, were it not that overcrowding 
made the rent per person less than the rent per room. There 
is little evidence, on the other hand, that landlords get large 
profits." This statement is confirmed by one who is particu- 
larly conversant with conditions in these sections. However 
this may be, the tenants complain bitterly that rents have in- 
creased greatly, and that in the old buildings conditions are very 
unsatisfactory. 

The condition of four typical North and West End tenement 
blocks is described by the 1915 investigator as follows: — 

The average condition of these typical blocks of the North and West 
End tenement districts is as follows: 84 per cent, of the entire block 
is covered by buildings; a four-story tenement house covers 84 per 
cent, of its lot, faces a street 25 feet wide, and has a yard of irregu- 
lar shape 12 feet wide behind part of the house; the halls and stairs 
are dark, dirty anet inadequately ventilated, and less than 3 feet wide; 
on the ground floor, a store; behind it, a small apartment; on each 
floor above, one apartment of three rooms; in the hall, a water-closet 
for each two families (eight persons) ; for each family the only water 
supply is a single faucet in the kitchen sink. In the three rooms live 
man, wife and three young children and one lodger (six persons) ; the 
wife and two younger children sleep in one room, and have 350 cubic 
feet of air per person; the man, older child and lodger sleep in the 
second bedroom, and have 250 cubic feet per person. The rent is 
$11.50 per month, — nearly $1 per week for each room. As some 
1,500 persons on these blocks are packed in twice as closely as comfort, 
decency and health allow, so live a large part of the 44,000 persons 
in the tenement districts of the North and West Ends. There is no 
indication that the congestion is decreasing in either the North or West 
Ends. 

Mr. Robert A. Woods of the South End House, in " Ameri- 
cans in Process," makes' the following interesting observations 
regarding housing conditions in the North and West Ends : — 

Rent at the North and West Ends is somewhat higher than in any 
other tenement-house quarter in the city, because of the high land 
values adjacent to the city's great traffic. Jews, in fact, seem willing 
to pay high rents, reducing the average cost by crowding the rooms 
of their tenements. They tend thus to make rent higher for others. 
In general, it may be said that families do not pay a larger share 



138 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

of their incomes for rent in the North and West Ends than in other 
districts of the city, but they get less for their money. In the vast 
majority of cases the rent charge comes between $2 and $3 per week. 
It has been thought by some students of the housing problem that the 
tenement-house congestion in the North and West Ends would be 
relieved by the building of small houses in the suburbs and the cheap- 
ening of transit facilities. Dorchester and West Roxbury have shown 
great gains in population since 1895, and a large number of small 
homes have been built in these sections. But it remains true that 
Ward 8, in the West End, increased in population during the same 
period faster than any other section of the city except the two suburbs 
named. It now has the distinction of containing the largest number 
of persons to the acre, 173.6. Ward 9, in the South End, ranks second, 
with 132.2; and Ward 6 third, with 104.3. Let it be noted, however, 
that the acreage of Dorchester is 5,590 and of West Roxbury 7,660. 
There were in 1900 only 10.6 persons to the acre in Dorchester, com- 
pared with 104.3 in the North End; and 3.1 persons to the acre in 
West Roxbury, in contrast with 173.6 in the West End. 

In Dorchester and Roxbury there has be£n a marked in- 
crease in the rents of the better-class flats, but conditions are 
changing very rapidly. The three-flat and six-flat houses were 
often hastily constructed, and are already rapidly depreciating 
in value. In a few years the expense for repairs, providing 
the property is kept in good condition, will be a very large item. 
The future of these sections may well be a serious problem. 
Congestion is increasing, and a change is already apparent in 
the character of the occupants in many sections. 

Mercantile Rents in Boston. — A prominent real estate 
broker, who specializes in store and office building property, 
having 600 to 800 tenants in various buildings under his charge, 
states that in the business retail districts rents are from 30 per 
cent, to 40 per cent, higher than in 1897, and in the wholesale 
district 10 per cent, to 15 per cent, higher. Mercantile rents are 
based on the market value of the premises leased; that is, on 
what similar premises rent for in the immediate vicinity. In 
some cases the rents are based on the increased cost of construc- 
tion, the tenant of the new building agreeing to pay a percentage 
on the land value and on the cost of construction. It seems 
lair, in general, to say that the greatly augmented cost of build- 
ing has a bearing on rents. As regards old buildings in the 
wholesale district, the rents have certainly increased, but not 



1910.] HOUSE— No. 1750. 139 

to so great an extent as in the retail districts. As regards the 
average net income, in the retail district property will sell on 
the basis of 4 per cent., and in the wholesale district similar 
property will sell on about a 5 per cent, basis. Both percentages 
are net to the owner. 

Brockton. — There is a diversity of opinion regarding the 
increase of rents in this city, but the weight of evidence indi- 
cates that there has been a considerable rise. Rents have not 
changed much in the buildings without modern improvements 
or in those situated outside the center, as the tendency is to 
desert these and move into the modern houses. Even young 
girls earn good pay in the factories, and often a family, of 
whom several are at work, now occupies a $35 flat, whereas ten 
years ago a much cheaper tenement was made to suffice. Fre- 
quently two or more members of a family are working, and the 
rent-paying ability is not measured by the wage of the head 
of the household. The average man is said to be earning about 
$15 per week, and if he lives in one of the older houses, he 
pays perhaps $15 or $17 per month. In a modern flat he may 
pay as much as $35, and let rooms to reduce his own rent. 

Fall River. — A prominent Fall River business man, who has 
been familiar with local conditions for a number of years, states 
that rents in that city were materially reduced in 1896-97, owing 
to the exodus of about 10,000 persons during the depression in 
the cotton industry. In his opinion, rents to-day are very little, 
if any, higher than they were after the reduction was made. 
Ever since the law went into effect requiring weekly payment 
of wages, the landlords have almost without exception adopted 
the plan of weekly payment of rents. This seems to have made 
it easier for the tenants than the old monthly arrangement. 
Of the 30,000 mill workers in Fall River, the vast majority pay 
about one week's wage for one month's rent. There are many 
instances, however, where a family includes three, four or even 
five workers, and in such cases it is not infrequent that the 
monthly rental exceeds the amount earned by the head of the 
family. While wages have increased very materially since 
1897, in the case of the mill operative, as well as the skilled me- 
chanic, the income from rented property has not increased in like 
proportion. From his experience as a banker and dealer in 



140 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

mortgage securities, this informant declares that the average 
Fall River mill worker lives far better than he did fifteen years 
ago. During this period a great change has taken place in 
the character of the houses built to let. The houses that are 
built to-day for dwellings are mostly of the three-tenement type, 
with bay windows, and having from five to seven rooms in a 
Hat. If there is a sewer on the street, the owner is obliged to 
connect with it, and to install bath rooms and water-closets. 
The former style of house, after the old six, eight, or even twenty 
tenement mill blocks went out of date, was the four-family, barn- 
roof structure, which used to let for about $1.75 a week per 
tenement. Another Fall River man of large experience says : — 

Undoubtedly the prevailing rents are somewhat higher than in 1397. 
The rents in new buildings are to a certain extent based on the in- 
creased cost of construction. The rents in old buildings have increased 
somewhat, but not to the extent of those in the newer ones. The 
average man is very much better housed than he was fifteen years 
ago, almost every one requiring water-closets and bath rooms at the 
present times. 

The secretary of the Fall River Co-operative Bank states 
that in 1897 the bank had 160 real estate loans, amounting to 
$263,500; in 1909 it had 341 loans, amounting to $575,750. 
These figures indicate that there has been a great increase in 
the number of persons who are taking advantage of this system 
of owning their own homes. 

Haverhill. — The reports indicate that rents are decidedly 
higher than in 1897. One correspondent states that the increase 
is nearly 33 per cent. While this is clearly an extreme state- 
ment, and is not substantiated by other reports, the consensus of 
opinion is that there has been a very material increase, which 
in the newer structures may approach this high figure. The 
average workingman pays about one week's wage a month for 
rent, and is better housed than formerly. The modern con- 
veniences have become necessities. 

Lawrence. — The rapid growth of this city, especially during 
the last Hive years, has affected both business and residential 
sections. The mercantile rents in the busy parts of the city 
have been abnormally raised in recent years by outside specula- 



1910.] HOUSE— No. 1750. 141 

tors, who have leased for a long term of years whole business 
blocks, and raised the rents of tenants from 25 per cent, to 75 
per cent. One real estate dealer states that in some cases rents 
have been more than doubled. The same is true to a less ex- 
tent in tenement rentals. As is always the case, this abnormal 
increase of dwelling rents has led to greater congestion. In 
many instances lodgers have been taken, to reduce the rent per 
person. The rents in the more select residential quarters of 
the city have advanced very considerably in recent years, yet, 
on account of great increase in land values and the greater cost 
of construction and repairs, the net return to the owner is de- 
clared to be rather less than it was ten or fifteen years ago. It 
is, however, agreed that, with the exception of the congested 
areas, the average man is vastly better housed than he was in 
1895. 

Lowell. — There seems to have been very little increase in 
rents since 1897. There has been a growing demand for modern 
houses outside of the city proper, — a condition made possible 
by the extension of trolley facilities. The average tenement is 
superior to that of fifteen years ago, with better plumbing, more 
windows, larger rooms, and in most cases a bath room. The 
weekly payment system is applied to rents, and collections are 
much more satisfactory than they were a few years ago. 

Chicopee. — About twelve years ago, there was a big slump 
in real estate values, on account of several large industrial es- 
tablishments going out of business, and rents dropped on an 
average about 33 per cent., with many idle tenements at that. 
Xew construction was at a standstill for nearly ten years. Many 
of the older properties, however, were improved and made more 
sanitary, but the number of rooms per family decreased. In 
many instances single houses have been remodeled into four- 
family houses. There seems to have been an average increase 
in rents of about 10 per cent, in buildings that existed in 1897. 
In the new buildings rents are governed to a great extent by the 
increased cost of construction. 

Springfield. — Eents in this city have increased considerably 
during the past fifteen years. Most of the old houses in the 
center have been torn down, and people have been obliged to 
take up with something better at a higher cost. Eents of $10 to 



142 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

$13 a month were paid for these old-fashioned houses. Accom- 
modations are no longer to be had at these rates, and there seems 
to be little likelihood that the demand for cheap tenements can 
be supplied by new construction, at the present prices of labor 
and materials. Land values are high, and rents are still going 
up. There has been a marked increase in the number of home- 
owners through co-operative bank loans. The report for 1908 
shows over 400 real estate loans, amounting to $566,375. 

Milford. — In this town there has in most cases been com- 
paratively little increase in rents. One man states : — 

Milford has had a peculiar experience in the past few years, owing 
to the many dwellings put up by the Draper Company. It has built 
a large number of modern dwellings, and the rent is very low, con- 
sidering the quality of the house. This has meant that rents in other 
tenements could not be raised to any noticeable amount. 

The Increase of Bents. — The general fact that rents have 
increased in the last ten or fifteen years is readily determined. 
The average percentage of increase cannot be stated definitely. 
In the light of the information gathered in this investigation, 
the approximate extent of the increase in the case of working 
people's dwellings and tenements might perhaps be indicated 
as about 12 per cent. Opinions obtained from a large number 
of competent observers of real estate conditions may be classified 
as follows : — 

Bent. Per Cent. 

Higher, no per cent, stated, 53.23 

5 to 10 per cent, higher, 3.23 

10 to 15 per cent, higher, 4.83 

20 to 25 per cent, higher, 8.06 

33 per cent, higher, 3.23 

About the same, 24.19 

Lower, 3.23 

While it is unquestionably true that in some cases rents are 
practically the same as they were fifteen years ago, or even 
lower, the great preponderance of evidence shows that through- 
out the State there has, on the average, been a decided increase. 
A distinction must be made, however, between new buildings 
and those built before the rise in prices. The rents in new 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 143 

buildings seem to a large degree to be based on the increased 
cost of construction. Rents in old buildings have increased 
somewhat, but not to the extent of those in more recent struc- 
tures. 

Any attempt to measure exactly the extent of the increase of 
rents encounters insuperable difficulties. In order to make ac- 
curate comparisons, some definite standard is necessary. There 
can be no standard tenement or dwelling. Even if a study is 
made of a certain house or block, the difficulty is not entirely 
done away with. A constant change may have been taking 
place in the make-up of the neighborhood ; in most cases there 
has been a considerable depreciation in the value of the build- 
ing, and perhaps some appreciation in the land value. 

There is, furthermore, no absolute rule by which to determine 
the exact rental which one may expect to receive from a dwell- 
ing. The amount of capital invested is often no criterion. One 
correspondent cites the following example : — 

I have now two houses in this city, exactly alike, built at the same 
time and costing precisely the same. One rents for $360 per annum, 
and the other for $720. In one case the Poles, Greeks and Armenians 
have kept getting nearer and crowding out the higher-priced tenant. 

A new house should rent for from 10 per cent, to 12 per cent, 
gross on its cost, including the cost of the land. At first, while 
the house needs no repairs, this would produce a net income of 
from 7 per cent, to 9 per cent., to be reduced a little later, when 
the repair problem appears, to something like 5% per cent., or 
in some cases 6% per cent. In the long run, about 40 per cent, 
of the gross return must be deducted for taxes, repairs, deprecia- 
tion, etc. A careful analysis of data collected in this investiga- 
tion shows that the average owner of rented houses nets from 
6 per cent, to 7 per cent, on his investment, more often 6 per 
cent, than 7 per cent. 

The first great reason for the advance of rents is the increase 
in the cost of construction over that of fifteen years ago. The 
percentage of increase is variously stated. The following letter, 
from a prominent Boston business man, will serve to illustrate 
this point : — 



144 COST OF LIVING. [May. 

I had occasion a few months ago to take up the matter of the dif- 
ference in cost in building in connection with some houses at A., and 
asked a contractor to give me a figure to duplicate a house which had 
been built there some ten years ago. He gave me the figures, and I 
stated to him that the increased cost over that formerly made was 
prohibitive, and he had better go over his figures and see what he 
could do. Upon repeating his estimates, he stated that he could not 
change his figures. This difference in price amounted to over 40 per 
cent., and his explanation was the increased cost of all materials enter- 
ing into the house; the question of shorter hours materially increased 
all labor costs; and in further conversation with some other builders 
in the same connection, I find that the figures did not vary materially. 

While it might be the fact that in a certain class of dwell- 
ings there has been the percentage of increase in the cost of 
construction indicated in this letter, this could not apply to the 
building of the two-flat or three-flat house, so common to-day. 
A well-known builder, who specializes in this line, states that 
a house which ten years ago he could build for $4,600 costs 
him to-day $5,400, — an increase of about 17 per cent. The 
great similarity in this class of houses makes it possible to 
lessen the cost of construction. He states that the average in- 
crease in all kinds of dwellings would not exceed 30 per cent. 
The prevailing opinion seems to be that there has been since 
1895 an increase of about 33% per cent. Whatever the cor- 
rect percentage may be, the rise is attributed to two causes: 
first, the increased cost of materials ; second, the increased cost 
of labor. 

The rise in the price of building materials has been variously 
stated. According to the statistics of the United States Bureau 
of Labor, in 1897 the relative price of lumber and other mate- 
rials used in construction was 90.4; in 1907 it was 146.9, or 
an increase of 62.5 per cent. The following table shows the 
prices of building materials in 1894, 1904 and 1910. The 
figures for the first two years were taken from reports of the 
Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor; those for 1910 
were obtained from an expert in building materials. 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



145 



Comparative Prices of Building Materials {Car Lots). 



Materials. 


1894. 


1904. 


1910. 


Framing, etc.: — 

Spruce frames, ordinary, .... 

Spruce frames, 12-inch, 

Spruce frames, 14-inch, 

Spruce studding 

Spruce boards, clipped 

Spruce boards, random, 

Spruce furring, 

Hemlock, eastern 

Clapboards, spruce: — 
Extras 


S13. 50-14. 00 
14.25-14.50 
15.50-16.00 
10.50-11.50 
14.00-14.50 
11.00-12.00 
12.50-13.50 
11.50 

30.00 
28.00 


$18.00-18.50 
20.50 
24.00 

17.00-17.50 
20.00-23.00 
17.00 
17.00 
15.00 

44.00 
42.00 
3.25- 3.50 

83.00-90.00 
40.00-45.00 
36.00 

3.25 
2.85- 2.95 

45.00 
28.00 

28.00-30.00 


$24.00 
26.00 
28.00 
20.50 
19.50 
19.00 
20.00 
19.00 

52.00 
50.00 


Laths, spruce 

Finish: — 

Michigan uppers, 

Whitewood, 

Cypress, 

Shingles: — 

Cedar, extras, 

Cedar, clears 

Hard-pine flooring (kiln-dried and dressed): — 

Rift 

Slash 

Dimension 


2.00- 2.25 

50.00-51.00 
28. 00-32. 00 
22.00-25.00 

3.30-3.50 
2.75 

45.00 
25.00 

23.00-25.00 


3.50- 3.90 

95.00 
64.00 
48.00-60.00 

3.45 
2.50- 3.00 

40.00-48.00 
28.00 

28.00 



This rise in prices is attributed by dealers to several causes, 
as follows : first, supply and demand (special mention is made 
of the fact that immense quantities of spruce have in recent years 
been consumed by the pulp mills) ; second, increased cost of 
labor in connection with milling; third, combinations controlling 
the output. 

The shorter working day and increased hourly wage of those 
engaged in the building trades are regarded by many persons as 
important factors in the upward trend of rents. It is difficult 
to determine exactly what percentage of the cost of construction 
goes for labor. A well-known builder states that if one in- 
cludes the milling, etc., the cost is often equally divided between 
labor and materials. This seems a rather high estimate, but 
labor is certainly a very large element in the cost of construc- 
tion. The following table, compiled from data to be found in 
Bulletin 71 of the United States Bureau of Labor, shows the 
relative wages in certain of the building trades in 1879 and 
1906: — 



146 



COST OF LIVING 



[May, 



Table of Relative Wages in the Building Trades. 





Relative Wage per Hour. 


Increase 
(Per Cent.). 


OCCUPATION. 


1897. 


1906. 


Bricklayer, 


99.4 


138.6 


49.2 


Carpenters, 


100.0 


141.6 


41.6 


Painters, 


100.5 


136.8 


36.3 


Lathers, 


106.2 


145.3 


39.1 


Plasterers, 


97.6 


148.7 


51.1 


Stone masons, 


100.3 


135.2 


34.9 


Steam fitters, 


101.5 


143.4 


41.9 


Plumbers 


101.2 


141.9 


40.7 



This table indicates that the average increase in the hourly 
wage of this group from 1897 to 1906 was 40.25 per cent. A 
similar table showing the decrease in hours of labor indicates 
an average of 23.5 per cent. 

Another cause of the upward movement of rents may be 
found in higher taxes. The following table is based on the last 
annual report of the city of Boston assessing department : — 





Tax on — 


1896. 


1908. 


Increase. 


Land, 

Buildings, 


$5,813,210 
4,200,196 


$10,727,234 
7,014,415 


$4,914,024 
2,814,269 


Totals, 


$10,013,196 


$17,714,699 


$7,728,293 



Thus we see that in 1908 the real estate in the city of Boston 
was burdened with taxes nearly seven and three-quarters million 
dollars greater than in 1896. In Ward 6 the total tax on real 
estate in 1896 was $1,343,070 ; in 1908 it was $2,804,439, hav- 
ing more than doubled in twelve years. Each year the valua- 
tion is materially increased, and the tax rate has advanced from 
$12.90 in 1896 to $16.50 in 1908. Economists hold that a tax 
on ground rent alone cannot be shifted, but a tax on buildings 
or improvements is usually shifted from landlord to tenant. 

If the assessed valuation and the amount invested were iden- 
tical, and the owner received from rentals 10 per cent, gross, we 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



147 



can readily see that the tax rate per $1,000 would indicate the 
per cent, of rent which must go for taxes. The general opinion 
of real estate men is that from 12 per cent, to 20 per cent, of 
the gross income or rent from dwellings is paid out for taxes. 
In the case of mercantile buildings it is said that the percentage 
is often greater. A well-known real estate broker, who has in 
his charge a very large number of buildings in both wholesale 
and retail districts, opened his books at random and found the 
following data : — 



Gross Earning. 



Tax. 



Per Cent. 



Building No. 1, 
Building No. 2, 
Building No. 3, 
Building No. 4, 
Building No. 5, 
Average per cent, of ren 



taken by taxes, 



$25,000 
23,500 
22,000 
24,000 
25,000 



85,000 
4,300 
4,500 
2,500 
5,250 



20.0 
18.3 
20.4 
10.4 
21.0 



18.0 



Increased taxes affect rent contracts in two ways: first, in 
many cases the lessee agrees to pay the taxes plus the rent; 
second, in other cases short contracts are made, say for five 
years, and upon renewal the lessee is obliged to share any tax 
increase. 

Co-operative Banks. — These agencies and kindred building 
and loan associations are increasing in number and usefulness. 
The following partial statistics show the tendency : — 





Massachusetts Co-operative Banks. 






1895. 


1908. 


Increase. 


Number of banks, 

Real estate loans 


119 
818,427,199 


137 
$46,989,242 


18 
$28,562,043 



The repayments of real estate loans in 1907 were the largest 
in the history of co-operative banks, amounting to $6,821,000, 
— an increase of $780,000 over the amount of real estate loans 
repaid during the previous year. 



148 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

The follow 
estate loans : 



The following table shows the number of foreclosures on real 



1895. 


1901. 


1908. 


$184,550.28 


$1,041,708.29 


$334,862.85 





From 1895 to 1901 there was a steady increase; from 1901 
to 1908 there was a steady decrease. The secretary of the Fall 
River Co-operative Bank states that the bank in 1897 had 160 
loans on real estate, amounting to $263,500 ; in 1909 it had 341 
loans, amounting to $545,750, thus showing a large increase 
in the number of persons presumably paying for their homes 
through this instrumentality. 

C. CLOTHING. 

To investigate comparative prices of clothing is a task of 
much difficulty, because the frequent changes of fashion leave 
few standards from year to year. In the matter of fabrics and 
other materials experts often disagree. Men long in the busi- 
ness were found to differ widely in opinion. Yet careful in- 
quiry made some generalizations possible. To pursue such 
inquiry a representative of the commission visited 28 stores and 
interviewed 66 persons in the clothing and apparel trade in 
Boston, and visited 70 stores and interviewed 142 persons in 
Lynn, Springfield, Worcester, New Bedford, Fall River, Haver- 
hill, Lawrence, Maiden, Wakefield and Lowell. Furthermore 
the commission interrogated leading representatives of the inter- 
ests concerned. The general conclusion is that in the past five 
years the advance in all cotton clothing to the consumer has been 
15 to 20 per cent., and in woolen clothing at least 20 per cent., 
and besides the retailer has taken a less margin of profit. 

The advance to the consumer has generally been felt in in- 
ferior goods for the same money, since there is a strong tend- 
ency in the retail clothing business to maintain certain price 
standards. In cotton-wool goods the advance is felt in greater 
proportion of cotton and less proportion of wool for the same 
money, or in lighter-weight fabrics, or, as it is generally put, in 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 149 

" manipulation." The all-wool garments are of lighter weight 
for the same money, or higher price ; or, as in woolen under- 
wear, the retailer may take much of the burden in the form of 
less profit. In cotton garments the situation is similar to that 
in woolen garments. 

1. Wool and Woolens. 

The consumption of domestic and foreign wool in this country 
increased but 3 per cent, from the decade 1889-98 to the decade 
1899-1908, according to the figures in the Statistical Abstract. 
The average of the population grew 21 per cent, from one decade 
to the other. The domestic production of wool increased in that 
time 6% per cent. The foreign importation fell off something 
more than 2 per cent. We import about one-third of the wool 
we manufacture. The Payne bill did not essentially change 
the tariff on wool. 

William Whitman, president of the National Association of 
Wool Manufacturers, said to the commission : — 

The price of wool to-day is practically the same as it was on the 
23d of October, 1907, when the financial panic struck us. I have looked 
over the prices of wool at that period. It took some time after that 
financial panic began before it affected the industrial and mercantile 
community. It did affect it, however, and the price of wool fell from 
those existing October 23, 1907, in the neighborhood of 25 per cent. 
One cannot state these facts with mathematical accuracy, but prac- 
tically on the 8th of May, 1908, we could have purchased for 62 cents 
what cost 84% cents in May of the previous year, and would have 
cost 81 cents at the time of the panic. There was a general suspension 
in the woolen business at that time, — I mean suspension of opera- 
tions. The farmers of the country could not sell their wool at the 
time it was sheared in 1908 with any degree of freedom at any price. 
Much of it had to be sent .to the seaboard for sale on commission, and 
the returns to the farmers were utterly inadequate. On the 8th of 
October, 1909, that same article which sold for 62 cents in May, 
190S. had advanced to 95 cents, or more than 50 per cent. There was 
a phenomenal advance, notwithstanding the conditions of the country. 
The price has since fallen, until to-day wool is at a parity with the 
prices of May and October, 1907, nearly three years ago. I may say 
in passing that although the decline in wool in our own country in 
1908 was so large, there was also a decline in foreign countries, but 
not to anything like the same extent. I suppose you are well acquainted 



150 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

with the fact that the textile industry at present is in a very unhappy 
condition; but, whether that is known or not, I now say, and speak 
with authority, that I have never known so great a change in the 
action of the cotton and woolen textile industry as has taken place 
within the last six or eight months, excepting during the period of a 
severe panic. 

On the other hand, the prices of fine, medium and coarse 
washed clothing Ohio fleece wool in the eastern markets at the 
beginning of January, April, July and October, of the five years 
1904-08, as furnished to the Statistical Abstract by Mauger 
& Avery of New York, showed an increase of more than 23 per 
cent, over the 'ixve years 1899-1902. 

Although Morrall Smith, treasurer of the iEtna Mills, told 
the commission that there had been some increase in the labor 
cost in woolen manufacturing in the last ten years, he said that 
the amount of it as affecting a suit of clothes would not be 
worth speaking of. He thought that there was no other im- 
portant cause for the increase in cost of this product save the 
cost of the material. 

Dealers in men's clothing were almost unanimous in reporting 
a rise in its price. For instance, Elwyn G. Preston, treasurer 
of the E. H. White Company, said that the prices of men's and 
boys' ready-made clothing had increased from 30 to 40 per cent, 
during the last few years, and that most of the increase had come 
in the " medium and lower grades, where the element of labor 
does not enter so largely." He contended, however, that the 
purchasers were getting a better garment than they got a few 
years ago. The method of manufacturing, he said, had changed 
wonderfully during the last decade, and by the aid of machinery 
a better-looking garment — one that has style to it — is pro- 
duced for the same money than would have been possible ten 
years ago. " It is undeniably a fact," he said, " that the ma- 
terials that go to make up a suit of clothes must, perhaps, be of 
inferior quality. In other words, if the same goods go into the 
garment, the price must be increased, — probably in women's 
goods as well as in men's." George A. Macomber, manager of 
the Talbot Clothing Company, declared there was less wool in a 
suit than there had been before the increase in prices during the 
last two or three years. The quality is not equal to what it was, 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 151 

he stated, although so far as prices on the counter were con- 
cerned there had been no great change. Mr. Macomber said 
that the cost of doing business had increased, irrespective of the 
merchandise itself, this including labor, rent, transportation, — 
everything that entered into the problem. " In the mean time," 
he continued, " the net profits have not increased. The gross 
profits have grown, as was natural and necessary, but the net 
have decreased, if anything." Fred G. Garmon, manager of the 
retail department of the Leopold Morse Company, agreed with 
other witnesses that, while the quality of the goods entering 
into a suit at a given price to-day might not be equal to that in 
the same-priced suit five years ago, yet the clothing itself would 
be better. It would be a great deal better in making and in 
style, even though the quality of the fabric in it would be lower. 
Mr. Garmon maintained that good shoddy is superior to virgin 
wool short stock, in that it is made of long stock. 

A $10 suit to-day is practically all cotton, but it is stronger. A man 
who really gets that suit for service will actually get more service 
out of it than he would have had out of a suit at the same price fifteen 
years ago. It is not as warm as the wool suit, but the wear and 
service, if the man has to have it for strength and wear, are greater. 
There is more to it to-day than there was fifteen years ago. 

2. COTTOX AXD COTTOX GOODS. 

Mr. Whitman also gave information to the commission con- 
cerning cotton prices. He stated : — 

Spot cotton was quoted September 9, 1903, at 12^ cents. It then 
declined until October 12, when it reached 9.60, — more than 20 per 
cent. From that point it rose steadily until February 1, 1904, when 
it reached 17.25, — an advance of more than SO per cent. The market 
then gradually declined, reaching 7 cents September 28, 1904. From 
that point it continued between 7 and 9 until July 5, 1905, when it 
suddenly jumped to 11.10, and August 23, 1905, reached 11.25. It 
continued fairly steady, rising to 12.60 December 7, 1905. Then 
it slowly declined, reaching 10.30 August 15, 1906. On the 30th of 
August. 1906, it dropped to 9.80, and September 28, 1906, reached 
its lowest point, 9.70. It gradually rose from this point to 13.55 Au- 
gust 30, 1907. I give this date because that was the date of the most 
destructive storm in recent years that has visited the cotton area, and 
it practically ruined the crop. The price then was 13.55. The market 



152 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

then fell off slightly, and continued to decline steadily until it reached 
9.90 April 19, 1908. On the 21st of June, 1908, it rose to 12.20, and 
then declined to 9.05 October 5, 1908, from which it steadily rose 
to 13.10 August 2, 1909. We regard this as the close of the season. 
On the 30th of September, 1909, it fell to 12.40, and then rose to its 
highest point December 30, 1909, — 16.15. It has declined somewhat 
irregularly since then until April 6, when spot cotton was 14.85. The 
present high price is very largely owing to disaster to the crop from 
failure and from the boll weevil, which is spreading. 

Even at its present price, cotton is the most useful fiber in the world, 
and it is the cheapest fiber in the world. Its uses are constantly in- 
creasing. These various new uses to which cotton is being put creates 
demand, and it is a very serious proposition how we are going to 
secure the supply to meet that demand. There is a great curtailment 
going on in its manufacture all over the country, northward as well 
as southward. I don't believe there is cotton enough to run the mills, 
and yet it is nearly twice and a half times as high to-day as I have 
known it to be. 

In the matter of cotton garments, the rise in raw cotton is 
generally assigned by retailers as the cause of advance. The re- 
tailers are trying to force down the price of garments into which 
cotton and wool enter by holding off their buying for fall de- 
livery. A hosiery manufacturing concern in Philadelphia is 
alleged to control most of the domestic hosiery output, which, 
by the way, seems to have advanced very little if any, but is 
said to have deteriorated in quality for the same price. The 
higher cost of labor and shorter hours are advanced as an element 
in the increased cost of garments, which it is averred has prob- 
ably not been entirely offset by improved machinery. Mr. 
Preston said : — 

In cotton underwear, made up of cotton exclusively, the increase 
seems to be at least 50 per cent., — in some cases even more than that. 
On the other hand, women's waists are substantially reduced. A waist 
that was $5 ten years ago may be bought to-day for $3, of equally 
good material and better style. 

Other Apparel. — Ten retailers interviewed said that they 
had noticed no difference in hats. Two stated a rise of 20 to 
30 per cent, in the retail price of felt and stiff hats ; one a rise 
of 121/2 to 15 per cent. ; one a rise of 33% per cent, in felt hats : 
one said that he got not so good a hat, although he was paying 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 153 

$1.50 more a dozen, to retail at $2 each: one thought that hats 
had improved for the same money; one thought that there 
had heen some deterioration, because of non-union help, for 
Guyer, at Danbury, and Philadelphia; one thought that the 
price might rise because raw fur is higher than ever before, 
but had noticed no difference yet. " Good outside fur,'' he 
said, " can cover up inferior quality." 

Eight said that the price of caps made in sections from rem- 
nants was about the same. One speaking of the cheap 10 and 15 
cent kind, said that they were better. People are wearing more 
caps than formerly, at all ages. Another said that caps were 
5 and 10 per cent, less in value, because formerly more 
worsteds had been used, and now they were of cashmeres and 
soft-finished stuff, — cotton in the medium and cheap grades. 

Sweaters are now much used instead of winter overcoats. 
There has been not more than 25 cents advance to retailer on $2 
and $2.50 sweaters within two or three years, and no advance 
to retailer on $1.50 sweaters within the same time. 

Cardigan jackets are of about the same values as during the 
past five years, perhaps better, due to competition of manu- 
facturers, even though cotton and wool are higher. 

The dollar shirt is declared by eleven dealers to have de- 
teriorated, say about 10 per cent. Shirts with cuffs attached, 
now popular, do not cost so much to manufacture as with cuffs 
detached. One way of depreciating a garment is to decrease 
the number of threads to the square inch in the warp and woof. 
As to the 50-cent shirt, one man said that it was better now, i.e., 
from 72 counts of thread to the inch to 80 counts ; one said that 
it was about the same ; three thought that it had depreciated in 
quality 10 per cent. ; two, that it had depreciated 5 per cent. ; 
another, that the price had increased 10 per cent. The price 
of both the 50-cent and the dollar negligee shirt has increased 
to the retailer. 

As to working shirts of madras, cheviot, sateen and twill, one 
dealer said that the quality of the 50-cent kind had fallen off 
more than 10 per cent, in six months: another, that it had 
fallen off in quality to the consumer 20 per cent., and that the 
price to the retailer had gone up from $4.25 to $4.50 regular, to 
$4.50 to $4.75 net. 



154 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Collars are as good as ever, though more cotton is used, in- 
stead of linen. Dealers claim that a cotton collar will stand the 
laundry better than linen. In linen collars one cannot expect 
so much 30 cents a pound linen as 18 cents a pound linen for 
the same price — two for 25 cents. 

The weight of evidence from eleven dealers interviewed on 
the matter of gloves is that there has been a gradual 10 to 15 per 
cent, advance on men's, women's and children's kid gloves of the 
dollar standard, felt in decrease of quality or in some cases in 
decrease of margin for the retailer, and a further advance of 
10 per cent is expected for next fall, based on the scarcity 
of skins in Europe and the consequent advance in the price of 
leather. The prices of silk and fabric gloves, and probably 
the quality, have remained about the same, since so small a 
quantity of material goes into them. 

In the matter of suspenders, probably there has been some 
falling off in quality, perhaps 10 per cent., due to rise of rubber 
and cotton in the elastic web, trimmings and labor. One man 
thought it a 20 per cent, falling off; three others could estimate 
no difference. 

According to seven retailers there is no profit in 50-cent over- 
alls, for which they pay $5.25 to $6 and more for the larger 
sizes, plus freight. One of them has advanced the retail price 
to 60 cents, another is going to advance it. One estimated also 
a 20 per cent, depreciation in the quality of the overalls. 

In millinery, style is of course the principal element of value. 
TTith a $5 trimmed hat to-day as a standard of comparison, five 
dealers said that the price had increased 20 to 25 per cent. 
Other dealers thought that the advance had been less. The 
weight of evidence is that $5 millinery is 15 to 20 per cent, 
higher, by reason of rise in cost of materials and labor. 

In general, our investigator thinks it fortunate that people are 
wearing more cotton garments and lighter weights. A medium- 
weight cotton underwear is becoming popular for all the year 
round. A low-priced clothier in Lowell says that he does not 
sell more than one boy's overcoat where he used to sell ten. 
The change to lighter garments may be due to the belief that 
winters are generally less severe than formerly; to the spirit of 
the ^resent " athletic age ; " to the warm street cars in sub- 



1910.] ( HOUSE — No. 1750. 155 

stitution for walking or other means of locomotion more ex- 
posed to the weather. 

Many dealers in wearing apparel stated that persons of all 
classes are to-day demanding better goods than formerly, and 
are willing to pay the correspondingly higher prices. Certainly, 
if the wearing power is also correspondingly better, and the gar- 
ment is worn longer, then the consumer's pocket does not suffer 
by his developed taste; but where " better goods" means more 
or better style, or, as is generally true in women's garments, 
the wearing power is not also correspondingly improved, then 
the pocket of the consumer does suffer by his developed taste. 
Indeed, the dealers assert that wearing power is of small con- 
sequence to the woman consumer, as compared with the style. 
For example, the style in women's hosiery is thin, fine stuff, 
more expensive to manufacture and of less durability than the 
coarser hose. 

As to local differences, the 'investigator reports that very 
cheap grades are sold to the mill workers in such places as 
Lowell and Fall River. As to comparative prices for the same 
grades of goods, he estimates that they are about the same in 
Boston and the other cities. Judging from figures quoted to 
him as to the cost of doing business as compared with gross re- 
ceipts in the Boston shopping district and the outside towns 
he concludes that the greater volume of business in Boston more 
than makes up for the disadvantage of larger rent. 

In summary, it may be said that all concerned in the textile 
industry and apparel trade maintain that while textile prod- 
ucts, like other staple commodities, have advanced notably in 
price during the past few years, the advances have been more 
than justified by the increased cost of raw material, wages and 
rent. The manufacturer and the dealer have not as yet been 
able to obtain from the consumer the price for the products 
covering the advances in the cost of production and distribu- 
tion. 

3. Boots and Shoes. 

Investigation of conditions in the leading manufacturing in- 
dustry of the Commonwealth, that of leather and its various 
products, including boots and shoes, reveals the chief cause of 
the increased cost to consumers to have been the constant ad- 



156 COST OF LIVING. , [May, 

vance in the cost of practically all the factors of production and 
distribution during the past decade. 

The same conditions exist in that other great allied Massa- 
chusetts industry, the manufacture of footwear, elastic goods 
and other articles in which rubber is largely used, although in 
this particular industry the enormous increase of the cost of the 
raw material that has taken place during the last few months 
has been by far the most important factor. 

Especial interest attaches to the leather and boot and shoe 
industry, not only because Massachusetts is the leading State of 
the Union in this important business, but because of recent 
changes in the tariff in connection with it. Moreover, this 
industry is one of the few great lines of industrial enterprise 
in the United States in which the trust form of control has not 
made headway. 

It is true that some of the leather and the machinery are 
largely under trust influence, but among the hundreds of shoe 
and slipper manufacturers engaged in business all over the 
country there is still the freest kind of competition. 

When the 15 per cent, duty on hides was removed, last 
August, it was expected by many that the prices of both hides 
and shoes would decline to some extent. Exactly the contrary 
has happened, for hides have been higher than they were before 
the duty was taken off, and shoes are considerably higher. 

In the case of leather, therefore, the increased price can hardly 
be charged to the tariff, and the increased price of boots and 
shoes cannot be ascribed in any important degree to the work- 
ings of any combination in restraint of trade. The higher cost 
of materials, — and there are many different kinds of articles 
entering into the manufacture of shoes ; the necessity of giving 
higher wages and shorter hours to employees; the growth of 
competition; the increased cost of distribution; and the tend- 
ency of the public to demand frequent and radical changes in 
styles and materials, — all these are the collective factors which, 
according to leading Massachusetts manufacturers who have tes- 
tified before the commission, are responsible for the higher 
prices that the retailer is to-day obliged to charge buyers of 
boots and shoes, bags, pocketbooks, belts, and, in fact, prac- 
tically every product of leather. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 157 

In connection with the inquiry as to leather market condi- 
tions, Andrew G. Webster, of Webster & Co., Boston, one of 
the best-known tanners in New England, stated that the supply 
of hides in this country is smaller than it has been for a long 
time, and that fewer hides are being produced here now than at 
any time in the last dozen years. There seems to be a fair sup- 
ply of hides in the rest of the world, but no great surplus. The 
claim is made that it is becoming less profitable in this country 
every year to raise cattle. Mr. Webster stated : — 

Probably more than 50 per cent, of the hides produced in this coun- 
try are produced by a dozen large packers, who perhaps work together 
and perhaps do not. They were able for the last dozen years, while 
the 15 per cent, duty was in effect, to get for American hides produced 
in this country about 12 per cent, more than the foreign market price. 
The prices of hides and meats have never seemed to bear any relation 
to each other. Generally speaking, strange as it may seem, when meat 
has been dear, hides have not been so dear; and when meat has been 
cheapest, hides seem to have been dearest. I think the increase of 
demand for leather is greater than the increase in supply of hides, and 
that is especially so at this time, when there are so many other pur- 
poses for which hides are used, besides shoes. 

Recent estimates place the number of sides of leather used in 
the manufacture of automobiles last year as about 800,000. 

Charles H. Jones, president of the Commonwealth Shoe and 
Leather Company, Boston, testified that during the thirty years 
his company has been in business its net profits on each pair of 
shoes manufactured have been only from 5 to 8 cents, with 10 
cents a pair in exceptional instances, or between 3 and 4 per 
cent, on the capital invested. Mr. Jones said : — 

The tendency in the case of the selling prices both of boots and shoes 
has been steadily upward for probably fifteen or twenty years. The 
reason has been principally the increased cost of the materials from 
which shoes have been made. The leather of nearly all classes that 
enters into the making of shoes has increased very greatly in price. 
Calf skin, the principal factor, was 18 to 20 cents a pound, and 
it is now 25 cents and 31 cents. Sole leather of a certain class, Buenos 
Ayres, ten years ago was 21 cents a pound ; to-day it is 24 cents. Other 
classes of sole leather that were used in those days were 27 cents, and 
are now 32 cents. The labor cost has increased also. There are less 
hours of labor, and larger wages for the same processes have been 



158 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

steadily paid. One very important factor in this advance has been the 
fact that the trade is constantly becoming more educated to the refine- 
ments and more exacting in its demands. It is well within my recol- 
lection when we used to put in the new last and use it for years. When 
the lasts were worn out we would buy more, and go on using them 
just the same. The last gives style and shape to the shoe. We used 
to figure the cost of lasts for our shoes as % of a cent a pair. To-day 
we never wear out a last. A change in the fashion demands a change 
in the style of the last, and we throw the lasts away; so that the cost 
of that item has been increased eight or ten fold. The style change 
has been so artificial and complete that we have had to throw away 
equipment that was in good order, to meet the demand of fashion for 
a different height of heel or shape of toe. Twenty years ago such a 
thing as that was not known. The people are more exacting in these 
days as to fits. We increase the variety of patterns. Besides the 
leather and those manufacturing items, there has been within a year 
or two an increase in the price of cotton goods; nearly all shoes are 
lined with cotton drilling or duck. Another factor in the increase, 
while small in a way, means hundreds of dollars a day, and that is 
the cost of wooden boxes in which shoes are packed. Our factory is 
in Plymouth County in the Brockton district, and ten years ago there 
was a very considerable quantity of second-growth pine which the 
farmers would cut up and sell to the box factories, it being one 
of their winter employments. Now the box manufacturers claim that 
it costs them a great deal more. I know that the box cost is 25 per 
cent. more. 

Then the costs of distribution have increased somewhat also. We 
are obliged to employ more travelling men; competition is more in- 
tense, for competition in the west has developed. The cost of the 
selling of shoes has increased notably in the last ten years in our 
factory. All these facts combined have forced prices gradually up, 
until a shoe that sold ten years ago on such a basis that it would retail 
for $3.50 a pair retails to-day at $4.50. There is no greater value 
to-day, but a very material increase in the cost of the goods to the 
wearer. As far as I can see, practically all those factors are permanent. 

The costs of leather have steadily advanced, and I cannot see any 
reason why they will not continue to do so. The domestic supply 
of heavy hides will not supply our needs within 60 per cent., nor has 
it supplied them for several years; the other 40 per cent, must be 
inrported. I can remember that in 1893, I think it was, hides were so 
cheap that it did not pay people in remote districts to take them off. 
There were immense ranches and ranges in those days, and the western 
people raised cattle with very slight expense, yet with considerable 
profit in the business. Hides were apparently abundant the world 
over. We got a great many African hides in those days. Since the 
Boer war we have had practically no hides from Africa. Of course 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 159 

the price of hides, like that of all other commodities,, is subject to 
extreme fluctuation; but the general tendency has been the same as 
in leather and shoes, — upward. We have seen the highest prices in 
the four months past that have been known in my recollection. The 
shoe trade was very active in trying to repeal the duty on hides, hoping 
to lessen the cost of shoes. We were successful in getting the duty off, 
and it was a very beneficial effect that followed. 

The price of sole leather to-day is not any higher than one or two 
years ago; it is selling at exactly the same price. On the other hand, 
calf skins are at least 15 per cent, higher; they, of course, were not 
subject to any relief. To-day the price of calf skins is much higher 
than it has ever been in the history of the trade in this country, and, 
as calf skins are the chief or largest factor in the cost of a pair of 
men's shoes, their abnormally high price at the present time naturally 
increases the cost of the goods. 

In reply to a question as to whether there has ever been a 
" gentlemen's agreement " to keep up prices in the shoe trade, 
Mr. Jones said : " Xo, there has not been, and it would be im- 
possible." In reply to a question as to whether or not some 
shoe manufacturers have made a great deal of money, he said : 
" I know one or two who may be worth over a million dollars, 
but not many." 

In the opinion of Mr. Jones, the price of American shoes is 
cheaper than the price of shoes in Europe ; and, considering the 
amount of individual production, the cost of labor must be fully 
as low here as anywhere. The rate of wages a day is very much 
higher in this country. 

George E. Keith of the George E. Keith Company, Brock- 
ton, one of the largest shoe manufacturing concerns in the coun- 
try, testified that a profit of 8 cents a pair is considered a very 
liberal profit by the average manufacturer, and expressed the 
belief that there is no business where the percentage of profit is 
any smaller than it is with the average manufacturer of shoes. 

Lewis A. Crossett made the following statement : — 

In comparing our 1909 business with that of 1903, I find that labor 
cost me 20 per cent, more in the fall of 1909, compared with the fall 
of 1903; the merchandise that entered into the shoe is 24 per cent, 
more; I have received for the shoes to the retailer 13V2 per cent, 
more; and according to my best judgment the retailer has received 
from the consumer 14 per cent, more for the shoes in 1909 than he did 



160 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

in 1903. These are the figures based on my average shoe of all grades. 
I made shoes in 1903 that retailed from $2.50 to $4.50 and $5, and 
the 1809 shoes retailed from $3 to $5. 

To go into the two costs: the merchandise is composed of upper 
leather and sole leather and findings. The upper leather has had a 
steady increase from 1903 right straight along, step by step, year by 
year. Sole leather has been more or less in the hands of those who 
manipulate it. It has varied from 42 cents up to 60 cents, and 60 
cents to $1. When you come to the findings, I note the same thing 
there, and the increase has been little by little and on the whole a 
gradual increase. The laborer has received in my factory 10 cents a 
pair more during this year. I paid 37 cents a pair more for mer- 
chandise. Now, 10 cents for labor and 37 cents for the merchandise 
has made 47 cents a pair more that the shoe has cost me. I find that 
I have received 35 cents a pair more from the retailer for my shoes, 
and I suppose, to the best of my judgment, corroborating Mr. Jones 
and Mr. Keith, that the retailer has received an average of 50 cents 
a pair more during that time for his shoes. 

The April issue of the " Monthly Consular and Trade Ee- 
ports " contained advices from hide-producing districts over all 
the world, showing high prices for hides everywhere, and a de- 
moralized condition of the shoe industry in England as a con- 
sequence. From Huddersfield Consul Bright wrote : — 

Hides selling at 8 cents a pound five years ago now bring 14 cents. 
During the last twelve months prices have risen 15 per cent., and 
tanners declare that it will soon be necessary to ask 49 cents a pound 
for leather which has recently been quoted at 37 to 42 cents. Manu- 
facturers claim that the cost of material for the sole and upper of a 
$2.55 shoe is 36 cents dearer now than it was a year ago. There has 
already been a considerable increase in the price of boots and shoes, 
and it is predicted that prices will continue to rise. 

The United Shoe Machinery Company, which equips fac- 
tories throughout the country, and has brought out 97 new 
commercial machines in addition to those acquired upon its 
formation in 1899, informs us : — 

The average royalty, direct and indirect, received for all classes of 
shoes does not exceed 2% cents a pair. It varies, according to the 
style and grade of shoe, from 3 /4 cent to 8 cents. Approximately the 
royalty received is divided as follows : labor, 1 cent ; invention, .33 
cents; interest on investment, .75 cents; earnings, .58 cents; total, 2.66 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 161 

cents. These figures necessarily are subject to some variation. In our 
general department there has been a reduction in price of 755 com- 
modities, comprising findings and shoemakers' supplies, averaging 23.6 
per cent. 

Manufacturers of rubber footwear in this State assert that 
there has been a total increase in prices during the last ten years 
of between 25 and 30 per cent. Much of this increase has 
taken place in the last two or three years, due to the phenomenal 
advance in the price of crude rubber, which has risen from 67 
cents a pound in 1908 to $3 a pound during the present year. 
It is estimated that more than one-half of the rubber goods of 
the country are manufactured in Massachusetts. 

The production of rubber footwear in the United States is 
now twelve times as large as it was in 1860, and it has been 
stated by one authority that to-day " druggists' sundries call for 
more rubber than the whole world used fifty years ago/' 

One of the contributing causes of these recent advances in 
rubber prices, and of the wild speculation in crude rubber in 
this and foreign markets, has' been the enormous demand for 
rubber for the manufacture of rubber tires. For this purpose 
alone the annual demand amounts to $30,000,000, and it is be- 
lieved that $50,000,000 a year will be required in the near fu- 
ture. Automobile tires demand more rubber than is called for 
by any other manufactured article. The extensive demand for 
rubber for electrical insulation is also an important factor in ad- 
vancing prices. 

The present average annual increase in the production of 
crude rubber is only about 11 per cent., and is entirely in- 
sufficient to meet the increasing demand. These facts appear 
to account satisfactorily for the prevailing high prices of boots, 
sandals and other articles in which the chief material is rubber. 



D. FUEL AND LIGHT. 

1. Coal. 
The advanced price of anthracite coal is an important ele- 
ment in the increased cost of living. The increase in the cost 
of bituminous coal need not be considered here, although in- 
directly it enters into the high cost of living in the product of 



162 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

factories and other establishments that use it. The average re- 
tail price of anthracite coal was $6 in 1897, and is now $7,814, 
— an increase of 30.2 per cent. This does not represent the 
real increase, which is even greater, because the quality of the 
coal delivered is not so good as formerly. The standard at 
the mines has been lowered, so that the coal contains more 
slate and bone. 

The higher prices fixed after the coal strike have not been 
lowered, the excuse being that they are justified by the increase 
in the wages of the miners. The prices charged by the opera- 
tors to the merchants and retailers have been the same each year 
since the coal strike, although the prices to the consumers have 
increased. This local increase may not exceed the added ex- 
pense of doing business, caused by the increase in wages, in 
grain, etc. 

The dominating cause for the maintenance of high prices is 
undoubtedly the fact that the supply comes from a very limited 
area in Pennsylvania, which is largely in the control of a 
monopoly. The local dealers also have an " understanding," 
which makes for the maintenance of high prices. 

The increase of coal production greatly exceeds the increase 
in population, and, although the uses of coal multiply, there 
seems to be no reason in the conditions of supply and demand 
for the excessively high prices. The rail freight rates are more 
favorable and the water rates have remained the same, the lat- 
ter being controlled by the railroads which own most of the 
mines. The increased difficulty in reaching the coal in the 
mines ought to be more than offset by the improved methods of 
mining and marketing it. 

The sea-going tugs that tow the barges have largely emanci- 
pated the business from the uncertainties of wind and weather, 
and make the supply much more regular. 

There is a marked tendency towards the use of the smaller 
grades of coal. One expert says that it is cheaper to use pea 
coal, which costs considerably less, even in furnaces, provided 
one understands how to do it. 

The poor are practically obliged to buy their coal in small 
quantities, at a greatly increased price. Besides the extra cost 
of handling the coal, they are generally obliged to pay a profit 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 163 

to an additional middleman, as most of the regular dealers 
do not care to bother with this class of business. To remedy 
this hardship, the creation of consumers' leagues or co-opera- 
tive societies, such as exist in Europe, ought to be encouraged by 
such organizations as the " Boston 1915, " to enable the poor 
to buy at least as cheaply as other consumers. It may be re- 
marked, also, that experts agree that the coal bill may be re- 
duced nearly one-half in most households by a careful study 
of the chemistry of combustion and the mechanics of drafts. 

2. Oil. 

The price of kerosene oil has gone down very little in the 
last twenty years, and the average price has remained about the 
same for the past few years. The retail price to-day varies 
from 10 cents to 15 cents a gallon, according to the situation 
of the store and the class of customers. Very poor people are 
sometimes able to get it for 9 cents ; the prevailing price is 12 
cents. The larger grocers do not sell it, because it is liable to 
spoil the other goods. 

It is not necessary to state that the business is chiefly con- 
trolled by the Standard Oil Company. Their wholesale price 
to-day in Boston is 8 cents. They sold oil as low as this twenty 
years ago. During the intervening years the price has some- 
times been a little higher. About the time of the coal strike 
it went as high as 10 cents. In 1907, under the influence of 
sharp competition, the price fell to 6 cents, and in the low-level 
year of 1897 it was as low as 5% cents. The retail price was 
then 8 cents. 

The quality of the oil is better than it was. The introduc- 
tion of tank wagons in place of barrels has decreased the cost 
of handling both by the company and the storekeepers. 

New sources of supply have been discovered in the last few 
years, and the rate of increase of the supply has far outstripped 
that of population, so that there seems to be no valid reason why 
the price of oil should not be lower than it is. 



164 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

3. Gas and Electric Light. 

Gas and electric light have not been factors in the increased 
cost of living. The price of gas has steadily decreased during 
the last two decades. The decline in the price of electricity be- 
gan later, because the industry was developed later, but the de- 
cline in the last ten years is even more marked than in the 
case of gas. The average price of gas for the State in 1890 was 
$1.46 per thousand feet; in 1909 it was $0,914. The average 
price of electric light in 1890 for the cities of Massachusetts 
was about 25 cents per kilowatt hour; the average price in 1910 
is about 13 cents. Moreover, the invention of mantles and the 
improvement in incandescent lamps have greatly increased the 
candle-power of both, so that much less gas or electric current 
is necessary to secure a given amount of light. 

Most of the saving thus secured has accrued to the consumers, 
but to offset this there has been a disposition to extend the 
application of gas and electric light to new uses, so that the 
total amount consumed has increased much more rapidly than 
the population. The only figures available show that in 1890 
there were 104,000 gas meters in the State, and 44,158 in Bos- 
ton; and in 1909, 411,463 and 121,734, respectively. 

The use of gas has become more general among persons of 
very moderate means. People are beginning to use it for heat- 
ing and cooking and also for engines. Massachusetts has lagged 
behind the rest of the country in extending the uses of gas, but 
to-day there is a gas stove for every consumer in the city of 
Fall River. This case is exceptional, but it demonstrates the 
possibilities. Under some conditions gas stoves are more eco- 
nomical than coal stoves, and careful study by householders of 
this, as of other questions of household economy, may result in 
savings. 

Indirectly, the cost of living is affected by the increased 
brilliancy of our stores and streets. The greater outlay for 
lighting must eventually be expressed in the prices of the com- 
modities sold, although the amount is almost a negligible quan- 
tity, and may be offset by the increased volume of business it 
attracts. 

It is an interesting fact that the difference in the expense of 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 165 

gas and electricity is steadily disappearing, so that we may ex- 
pect the extension of the use of electricity to a larger and larger 
class of consumers. It is also significant that the decline of the 
price of gas and electricity has followed a sharp competition 
between the gas and electric light companies, and that this com- 
petition, which it is the policy of the State to maintain, has 
stimulated inventive genius, and has resulted in the improve- 
ment of the manufacture, distribution and use of both gas and 
electricity, and also in a better business organization of the 
companies. The economies have been made in the face of ris- 
ing wages, and to some extent in spite of an increase in the 
price of the materials used. 

A tendency to consolidation is apparent in each field. The 
Edison Electric Illuminating Company supplies 31 cities and 
towns besides Boston. The Boston Consolidated Gas Company 
supplies a population of not far from 700,000. The capital 
stock of the Edison Company is $13,603,400 out of a total of 
$23,241,849 in the State, and the capital stock of the Boston 
Consolidated Gas Company is $15,124,600 out of a total of 
$32,289,863. 

The increased volume of business tends to keep the prices 
low, and this, with the other causes for declining prices, still 
operative, makes it possible to say, with the State Board of 
Gas and Electric Light Commissioners : " That further reduc- 
tions may be made, we have no reason to doubt." 

4. Slate ix Coal. 

The Legislature referred to this commission the petition of 
Anna T. Steinauer for legislation to provide for an investiga- 
tion of the sale of coal at retail, as follows : — 

Resolved, That the governor shall appoint a commission of three 
persons to investigate the subject of the sale of coal at retail and to 
determine whether any fraud or imposition is practised upon the public 
in respect to the price or quality of the coal sold to retail consumers. 
The commission shall receive such compensation and such allowance for 
their necessary expenses as may be fixed by the governor and council. 
The commission shall report to the next general court not later than 
January fifth, nineteen hundred and eleven, with such recommendations 
for legislation as they may think proper. 



166 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

The comniissioii gave a hearing to the petitioner, who averred 
the presence of quantities of slate in anthracite coal, especially 
that sold in bags to the poor of cities, and also the mixing of 
different sizes of coal, with fraudulent result. The commis- 
sion was of the belief, and so informed the petitioner, that 
legislation in such a matter was impracticable, unless the evil 
were shown to be widespread; and it asked her to furnish the 
names of persons having knowledge of the case, of whom inquiry 
might be made, which she undertook to do. Unfortunately, 
she was prevented from furnishing the names until after the 
hearings of the commission had been closed, and the work of 
preparing this report was so pressing that individual inquiry 
by members of the commission seemed impossible. Under these 
circumstances it was decided to delegate former Representative 
Myron E. Pierce to investigate the matter in our behalf. His 
report, which seems to us adequate and impartial, is as fol- 
lows : — 

To the Commission on the Cost of Living. 

Gentlemen : — Since April 23, when the above resolve was referred 
to me, I have interviewed six superintendents of large coal wharves; 
a number of householders, including those whose names were given to 
the commission by the above petitioner; three coal experts of high 
standing; various coal company officials, including the president of a 
company selling about 1,000,000 tons a year at retail; and the State 
and Boston sealers of weights and measures. I have examined the 
quality of the coal on the wharves and in private bins, I have measured 
the meshes of many of the screens, and in general I have tried to 
inform myself in regard to the process of handling the coal. 

My findings are as follows : — 

I. The quality of the coal received by the dealers and sold to the 
consumers is not so good as it was ten years ago; but, in my opinion, 
as the business is generally conducted, this fact does not constitute 
a " fraud or imposition " on the public. 

II. There is a tendency to mix the smaller coal with the larger 
coal, and also to mix the larger coal with the smaller coal; but again 
I am of the opinion that, as the business is generally conducted, these 
facts do not constitute a " fraud or imposition " upon the public. 

III. I make no finding on the question of under weights, but in- 
clude some data on the subject in this report. 



1910.1 HOUSE — No. 1750. 167 



Finding I. 

My informants were almost unanimously of the opinion that there 
is more slate, bone and ash in the coal now being delivered than for- 
merly. This was admitted even by the coal company president, 
although he at first denied it. I place great weight on the testimony 
of the wharf superintendents, on account of their practical knowledge 
of the situation, and also on the testimony of the three experts. 

The smaller sizes are more subject to impurities than the larger, 
because the larger sizes are picked by hand, whereas the smaller sizes 
from nut down are picked by machinery. 

The above-named petitioner showed me a barrel and a bushel of 
ashes and three-quarters of a bushel of clinkers, etc., which she said 
was what was left from half a ton of coal for which she paid $3.75. 
Both Expert A. and Expert B. said that this was too large a per- 
centage of waste; the former thought it almost twice what it should 
be; the later, that it was about one bushel more than the average, and 
that the average was higher than it ought to be. 

Expert A. said that the standard at the mines was lowered at the 
time of the coal strike, and that it had not been raised since then. 
He said that 20 per cent, of slate and bone was now permitted by the 
company inspectors. This statement was confirmed by the coal com- 
pany president. 

Expert A. said that it was " very common " for him to find 400 
pounds of refuse in a ton (2,000 pounds), which according to him 
was " twice as big as it ought to be." 

He recalled one case of a 30-ton lot in which he found two-thirds 
glistening coal and one-third slate and bone. The two-thirds yielded 
9V2 per cent, of ash and the one-third 22 per cent, of ash. The charge 
for testing was $15. The coal company gave the woman a rebate, on 
the strength of his report. 

His own standard is about 10 per cent, of ash. He said, however, 
that it was always necessary to consider the chemical constituency of 
the ash, because, if there is a good deal of lime in it, it will flux and 
create a large amount of refuse. One such case showed an increase 
from twelve barrels a week of ashes, etc., to twenty-two barrels, 
although according to the chemical test the percentage of ash in each 
case was the same. 

Expert A.'s standards in a book on boilers, published in 1897, were 
as follows : — 

Lehigh : — Per Cent> 

Water, 1.97 

Volatile matter, 4.35 

Fixed carbon, 86.49 

Ash, 7.19 



168 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Lykens Valley : — Per Cent. 

Water, 1.50 

Volatile matter, 7.84 

Fixed carbon, 81.07 

Ash, . . , ....... 9.59 



He thought that Franklin and Susquehanna should show about the 
same percentage of ash as Lykens Valley. 

Expert B. looked through his card catalogue of tests and analyses, 
and gave me the average percentages of ash by sizes of coal which 
he had found recently. They are as follows : — 

Per Cent. 

Furnace, egg and stove, 11 

Chestnut, . ... . . 13 

Pea [ 17 

rea > [13-25 

Screenings, . 12V2 



The larger sizes run more uniform than the unprepared coal. He 
felt that these percentages were higher than they ought to be. This 
winter he tested in his own furnace a ton of Franklin coal, and found 
that after picking out 16 per cent, of slate and bone he had in the 
remainder 11 per cent, of ash. He paid $9 a ton for the coal. 

The pea coal that he is now buying for his furnace yields 14 per 
cent, of ash. 

Expert B.'s table, above, which shows what the percentage of ash 
actually is in the coal now being delivered, may be compared with 
the following analyses a coal company advertised for the purpose 
of showing the quality of the goods they pretended to sell. This book- 
let is dated 1906, and is arranged by geological fields : — 



Section. 


Water 
(Per Cent.). 


Volatile 

Matter 

(Per Cent.). 


Fixed 

Carbon 

(Per Cent.). 


Sulphur 
(Per Cent.). 


Ash 
(Per Cent.). 


Northern, . 
Eastern middle, . 
Western middle, . 
Southern, . 


3.42 
3.92 
3.24 
3.05 


4.38 
3.08 
3.84 
4.45 


85.24 
86.39 
81.82 
85.80 


.73 
.54 

.54 
.57 


6.23 

6.07 

10.56 

6.23 



The slate and bone allowance given in the 
is as follows : — 



coal trade" for 1910 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



169 



Coal. 


Slate 
(Per Cent.). 


Bone 

(PerCent.). 


Total 
(Per Cent.). 


Broken, 


2 


1 


3 


Egg, 


2 


2 


4 


Stove 


4 


3 


7 


Chestnut, 


5-7 


5 


10-12 


Pea 


8 


10 


18 


Buckwheat 


10 


10 


20 



One superintendent condemned a cargo of Lehigh, on the ground that 
it contained 20 per cent, of slate and bone. He had been much dis- 
satisfied with the shipments for some time, and condemned this cargo 
from the wharf. He was backed up by the officials of his company, 
but was eventually compelled to keep the coal. He picked it, however, 
before selling it to his customers. 



Eeasons given for the Decline in the Quality. 

1. The anthracite coal supply is controlled by a trust, of which 
George F. Baer is the leading spirit. It all comes from 400 square 
miles of territory in northeastern Pennsylvania. The coal dealers are 
obliged to take what the operators choose to send them. 

2. The best veins were mined first, and they are now getting into 
coal strata many of which are of inferior quality. 

3. Some of the picking is now done by machinery. 

4. The standard of inspection has been lowered. 

5. There is no system of State inspection in Pennsylvania for quality 
and size. 

6. Formerly there was no demand for the smaller g Ta des, and they 
were thrown out. These piles are now being worked over and marketed, 
and, having been exposed to the elements, they are not so clean as 
when mined. 

Finding II. 

Two of the householder's bins that I examined contained nut coal 
with a large percentage of pea coal in it. The payment had been for 
nut, which is $1.50 more'a ton than the pea. 

Expert A. said that " in a great many cases " pea was mixed with 
the nut to the extent of 25 per cent. 

Expert C. said that there is a tendency to mix the grades of coal 
for which there is the smallest demand, or which cost the least, with 
the other grades, for the sake of working them off. It was generally 
admitted that large coal is mixed with small coal, and several felt that 
this is the reason why customers are calling more and more for the 
smaller grades. 



170 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Expert B. said that a Maiden dealer sold his stenographer what pur- 
ported to be anthracite coal, but which proved by analysis to contain 
one-third bituminous coal. 

One wharf superintendent said that the grading of the coal at the 
mines is " very unsatisfactory." The manager of the company con- 
firmed the statement. 

Another coal official said he is going to enlarge the meshes in his 
rotary screen, because of complaints that have been made. 

The principal grading is done at the breaker, and the coal comes 
all graded. Most of the dealers, however, screen it again as it goes into 
the teams. The coal that goes through the screens is afterward put 
through a separator or conveyer and regraded. Some of the companies 
get their lower grades of coal, from the pea coal down, almost entirely 
by this process. The old separators had inclined flat screens of dif- 
ferent-sized meshes, which vibrated from side to side. Many of the 
dealers are now installing cylindrical screens similar to those used at 
the mines. 

So far as the coal graded by the dealers is concerned, much depends 
upon the individual driver. If he is careless, and opens the throttle 
wide, the large coal pushes the small coal over the screen so rapidly 
that it is carried into the cart and does not go through the screen. 

The great difficulty in the question of grading arises from the fact 
that there are no standard meshes. This means that one dealer may 
differ from another as to what he thinks the size of pea coal should 
be. It also makes it easy for the dealer to meet the complaint that 
the coal is smaller than it ought to be. The mesh should be larger 
if it is round, and also if the coal is wet. The following tables illus- 
trate the differences of opinion on the sizes of the meshes : — 



COAL. 


B. F. Sturte- 
vant's Book, by 
W. B. Snow, on 

Mechanical, 

Draft, Round 

Mesh. 


The 

" Coal Trade," 

1910, 

Square Mesh. 


Delaware & 

Hudson Company, 

Square Mesh. 




Through. 


Over. 


Through. 


Over. 


Through. 


Over. 


Egg, 

Stove 

Chestnut, 

Pea, 

Buckwheat, .... 


2H" 
2H" 

1%" 
y 2 " 


2M" 

1" 
5 A" 

9 /l6" 

Vs" 


2%" 
2" 
Ws" 
%" 

V2" 


2" 

1M" 

Vi" 


2%" 
2%" 
l%" 

H" 
¥2" 


2Vs" 

■ %" 
V2" 



Some of the measurements which I made were as follows : — 



1910.1 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



171 



A Flat Screen with Square Meshes. Through. 

Stove, 2" 

Nut, VA" 

Pea, %" 

Dust, W 

A Rotary Screen with Round Meshes. Through. 

Nut, 1%" 

Pea, W 

Screenings, %" 

Another Flat Screen. 0ver# 

Nut, 1" 

Pea, %" 

Chute Screens. 0ver 

Furnace, l 3 /4" 

Egg, iy 4 " 

Stove, 1" 

Nut, %" 

Pea, y 2 " 

The old-fashioned hand screens, upon which coal is thrown by shovel, 
are said to have measured as follows : — 

Egg, 1%" 

Stove, 1" 

Nut, %" 

Pea, %" 

The following percentages of different sizes are allowed in each by 
the Philadelphia and Reading purchase contract : — 

Broken, 5 per cent, of egg. 

Egg, ■ . .5 per cent, of stove. 

Stove, ........ 5 per cent, of chestnut. 

Chestnut, ' 1° per cent °f P ea - 

o per cent, of buckwheat. 

p 1 15 per cent, of buckwheat. 

[ 5 per cent, of rice. 

Buckwheat, 15 per cent, of rice. 



172 COST OF LIVING. [May, 



FlXDIXG III. 

Under the Revised Laws, chapter 57, sections 83-93, the local sealers 
of weights and measures are authorized to intercept teams of coal on 
their way to the householder and to reweigh them, comparing their 
weight with the weight given on the certificate that the driver is required 
to carry. 

They are also authorized to weigh coal sold in quantities of less 
than 100 pounds, which are required to be sold in bags or baskets 
plainly marked with the name of the person putting them up and 
the weight of the coal therein. 

The returns to the State Sealer of Weights and Measures show that 
very few cities and towns have acted under this law, and that those who 
have done so have made only a few tests. The Boston sealer has made 
the best showing in the last two or three years. In 1909 the Boston 
office made 49 reweighings of team loads of coal : 13 were under weight, 
33 were over, and 3 weighed the same as the weight given on the cer- 
tificate. One was 140 pounds under weight, another 100, another 85, 
and the rest varied from 5 to 30 pounds. The over weights ran as 
high as 100 and 145 pounds. No prosecutions were instituted, because 
in most cases observation of several loads showed that they evened 
up. Thus far, in 1910, 5 out of 14 reweighings have been under 
weight. 

The Boston sealer in February of this year began a campaign of 
reweighings of small bags of coal. Out of 302 tests, 7 were con- 
sidered bad enough to justify action in the courts, and fines were 
imposed running from $5 to $20. 

The coal dealers are required to take out a license from the Secre- 
tary of the Commonwealth. Cities and towns are empowered to pre- 
scribe the conditions and terms under which the licenses may be 
granted. The Superior Court upon com]3laint may revoke licenses 
" for using false weights or measures, for charging exorbitant or 
excessive prices, for conspiring, combining unlawfully with other 
persons, or unlawfully discriminating in the conduct of said business 
or for any other just and sufficient reason." (Acts of 1903, chapter 
484.) 

All coal is weighed by sworn weighers, appointed by the mayor 
with the confirmation of the board of aldermen, or by the selectmen. 
In Boston this year there are 282 sworn weighers. They are simply 
employees of the companies, who take oath to weigh honestly. 

The Acts of 1907, chapter 394, provide penalties for giving false 
or insufficient weight or measure, running as high as a fine of $50 
and imprisonment for not less than thirty or more than ninety days. 

At common law, a criminal action would lie for cheating only where 
the cheat was of a general character, addressed to the public and exe- 
cuted by means of a latent false device or token, and then only in 



1910.] HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 173 

case common prudence could not have guarded against it. If the 
weights used were themselves false, or if the weight marked on the 
bag was false, there would be a basis for criminal action; but if 
the measure used was honest, and the amount was short, no action 
would lie at common law, because the purchaser by the exercise of 
ordinary prudence might have ascertained that it was short of the 
just measure. I find a case where the purchaser got 16 gallons of beer 
instead of IS, which was held not to be indictable, on the ground 
that it was a mere private deception. 

There was a Pennsylvania case where barrels of bread sold to the 
United States Army were marked 88 pounds when they contained only 
68. This was held to be indictable, the marking being a false token. 
(Resp. v. Powell, 1 Dall. 47.) 

Of course now under the statutes an action may lie for obtaining 
money under false pretenses; it is necessary, however, to show a de- 
liberate and intentional effort to deceive. 

I find one case where the accused contracted to sell and deliver a 
load of coal at Id. per hundredweight. He delivered a load which he 
knew weighed only 14 hundredweight, but which he stated contained 
IS hundredweight, and he produced a ticket showing such weight, 
which he said he made out himself when the coal was weighed. The 
buyer paid him for IS hundredweight, or 2s. 2d. more than was due 
him. It was held that he was indictable for obtaining 2s. 4d. under 
false pretenses. (R. v. Goss, 8 Cox C. C. 262; R. v. Ragg, Bell 
C. C. 214.) 

On the question of quality I think that it would be hard to make out 
a ease, unless the quality were very carefully specified in the contract 
and an intentional variation from the specifications should be proved. 
I find the case of a sale of a watch marked and represented to be 
18 karat gold, but that was not, which was held to be indictable. (R. v. 
Suter, 10 Cox C. C. 577.) 

Possible Recommendations. 

1. That local sealers of weights and measures be requested to notify 
householders that they will reweigh coal if they are notified in time 
to intercept the load on its way. As there are only six outside deputy 
sealers of weights and measures in Boston, it would have to be under- 
stood that these officials could not respond to all calls. 

2. That some provision should be made by cities and towns which 
would enable the householder to have his coal analyzed at public ex- 
pense, so that he would have an authoritative analysis of his coal with 
which to go to his dealer for the purpose of getting a rebate. This 
might be worked on the analogy of the milk inspection. 

3. That all coal should be inspected in the ship, barge or car before 
it is unloaded, by public inspectors provided for that purpose by the 
city or State. On this point the following data mav be of interest : — 



174 COST OF LIVING. [May, 



Coal delivered in Boston in 1908. Tons. 

Anthracite by sea, 1,733,112 

Anthracite by rail, 43,289 

Bituminous domestic by sea, 3,240,562 

Bituminous foreign by sea (Nova Scotia), . . . . 370,709 

Bituminous domestic by rail, 62,367 

Total, 5,450,039 

The coal brought by sea came in 1 steamer, 13 schooners and 1,380 
barges. The schooners averaged 650 tons and the barges 1,248 tons. 

There are about 2,200 retail dealers in New England and 1,089 in 
Massachusetts, or about 1 to every 2,500 of the population. This 
means that each sells only about 4,000 tons a year, on the average. 

This recommendation would involve the creation of standards of 
meshes and of percentages of ash, etc., in the coal. 

As in all regulation, there would be the danger of increasing the 
price to the consumer, which would have to be considered. 

4. That poor people, who are obliged to buy in small quantities and 
therefore at high prices, be encouraged, either by private or govern- 
mental means, to form consumers' leagues such as they have in 
Germany. 

In closing, I wish to call attention to the fact that my investigation 
has been confined to the subject of anthracite coal, and also that time 
has not permitted me to make so exhaustive a study of the subject 
as I should have liked. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Myron E. Pierce. 

April 28, 1910. 

In matters of this sort, the commission is of the belief that the 
sense of responsibility to the public on the part of the mer- 
chants concerned should have a chance to assert itself before 
penal legislation is put on the statute book. The list of crimes 
and misdemeanors should not be increased save with grave rea- 
son. With attention publicly called to the danger of deceit 
and unfair dealing in this direction, it is to be hoped that the 
persons who are most interested in keeping the confidence of the 
public will take steps to remedy the evils in question, so far 
as may be in their power. We recommend, therefore, that the 
State Sealer of Weights and Measures be instructed to report 
to the next General Court what, if any, legislation may then 
seem to him necessary for the public protection in this regard. 



1910.] HOUSE— No. 1750. 175 



E. SUNDRIES. 

This division of expenditure includes all outlay not embraced 
under food, rent, clothing, fuel and light. Such expenditure 
covers a very wide range. The important items are: expend- 
iture for the maintenance of health, including physicians' 
fees and medicine; recreation and amusement; education and 
religion; books and papers; charity and taxes; liquors and to- 
bacco; insurance and benefit dues; organizations, clubs and so- 
cial purposes in general. Expenditure for sundries increases 
proportionately as the size of the income increases. On the 
other hand, when incomes are lowered, or the purchasing power 
of money is reduced by a rise of prices, this class of expenditure 
is the first to be cut down. Important phases of the growth of 
this class of expenditure are discussed in other chapters, espe- 
cially drink, luxury and amusement, and no special treatment 
is demanded here. 

F. COLD STORAGE. 

The use of cold storage in the preservation of various kinds of 
food products, which has been developed greatly in recent years, 
has been connected in the popular mind with the recent advance 
in prices. The business has been subjected to violent abuse in 
many quarters. It has been made a kind of scapegoat for 
the public excitement, aroused by the increased cost of living. 
Drastic measures for the prohibition of cold storage, or its 
stringent regulation, have been proposed. Cold storage has 
been characterized by a recent writer as " a sinister and mys- 
terious factor in the cost of daily food." 

The popular arraignment of cold storage involves two counts : 
that it increases prices, and that it menaces public health. It has 
been charged that prices have been raised by the action of food 
speculators in putting goods in cold storage and holding them 
there for long periods, thus creating a shortage of supply and 
forcing an artificial advance of prices. The cold-storage facili- 
ties have been utilized, according to this somewhat common opin- 
ion, for the purpose of exploiting the consuming public by this 
new device. It has also been charged that the public health has 
been injured through the consumption of food carried in cold 



176 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

storage until it has become unfit for human consumption. Thus 
the cold-storage business has been accused of manipulating the 
supply of food products in speculative fashion, and of lowering 
their quality through the deteriorating influence of the storage 
process. 

Much of the popular clamor about cold storage must be set 
down to ignorance and hysteria. Impartial inquiry into the 
methods of cold storage leads to the conclusion that the general 
principle is sound and beneficent. The Hon. James Wilson, 
Secretary of Agriculture, stated, in his testimony before the 
sub-committee of the House of Representatives, investigating 
food storage and prices in January of this year, that " Cold 
storage is a great blessing to humanity. It is a great blessing 
to be able to put meat, vegetables, fruit, etc., in cold storage, 
where they will keep. There is no doubt about that." Secre- 
tary Wilson remarked further, however, that cold storage " en- 
ables the capitalist, when prices are low, to fill his cold-storage 
warehouse and hold his products in storage until prices are 
higher." On the other hand, he pointed out that " If we had 
no cold storage, and could not keep meat at all that way. it would 
tend to raise the price, because there would be no way of doing 
it except keeping the animals alive." Dr. H. W. Wiley, Chief 
of the Bureau of Chemistry of the Department of Agriculture, 
also declared that cold storage is a great blessing to the public 
in many respects, when not abused. 

The cold-storage process is simply the application on a large 
scale of the principle of food preservation, as used in the cellar 
of the farm or the ice chest of the home. The principle is the 
storing of food in the time of plenty for its later use in time of 
scarcity. It may be remarked that the canning of food prod- 
ucts, which has developed to enormous proportions, is another 
application of the storage principle. Tinned storage preceded 
cold storage. The latter method is applied mainly to very per- 
ishable products, such as eggs, butter, poultry and beef, which 
otherwise could not be preserved for any length of time : but it is 
used also for a great variety of products. The following list of 
articles stored in the Boston warehouses of one company indi- 
cates the wide scope of the business : — 



1910.' 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



177 



Poultry. 


Egg's. 


Honey. 


Game. 


Provisions. 


Bananas. 


Food fish, fresh. 


Flour. 


Buckwheat. 


Fish for bait. 


Cereals. 


Chestnuts. 


Oysters. 


Rice. 


Cream. 


Meat, fresh. 


Macaroni. 


Cucumbers. 


Oranges. 


Peanuts. 


Hams. 


Lemons. 


Beer. 


Hops. 


Apples. 


Ferns. 


Lard. 


Pears. 


Plants. 


Peaches. 


Cranberries. 


Bulbs. 


Sauerkraut. 


Grapes. 


Condensed milk. 


Sausage casings. 


Berries. 


Canned goods. 


Anchovies. 


California fruits. 


Syrups. 


Brussels sprouts. 


Eaisins. 


Fruit juices. 


Caviar. 


Figs. 


Yarn. 


Cherries. 


Dates. 


Gutta-percha. 


Smoked fish. 


Prunes. 


Jellies. 


Pickled fish. 


Apricots. 


Apple waste. 


Dried fish. 


Evaporated peaches. 


Cider. 


Egg plant. 


Evaporated apple. 


Pickles. 


Limes. 


Citron. 


Cauliflower. 


Holly. 


Currants. 


Preserves. 


Smilax leaves. 


Nuts. 


Salad dressing. 


Laurel leaves. 


Confectionery. 


Oleomargarine. 


Peppers. 


Beans. 


Grape fruit. 


Pineapples. 


Peas. 


Maple syrup. 


Radishes. 


Spinach. 


Maple sugar. 


Rhubarb. 


Potatoes. 


Oils. 


Mushrooms. 


Carrots. 


Woolens. 


String beans. 


Cabbage. 


Skins. 


Sweetbreads. 


Lettuce. 


Furs. 


Olive oil. 


Turnips. 


Parsley. 


Olives. 


Onions. 


Shalots. 


Sponges. 


Asparagus. 


Leeks. 


Candied fruits. 


Squash. 


Shrimp. 


Wines. 


Parsnips. 


Scallops. 


Herbs. 


Horseradish. 


Clams. 


Pickled meats. 


Melons. 


Crabs. 


Smoked meats. 


Butter. 


Lobsters. 


Dried meats. 


Cheese. 







In his testimony before the commission, Mr. Charles H. 
Utley, president of the Quincy Cold Storage Company, stated 
the general function of cold storage very fairly as follows : 



178 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

It simply means that the storage covers the best means known at 
the present time for preserving perishable foods from the time of their 
great abundance to their time of scarcity. That principle seems to 
me to be so plainly desirable that it is hardly open to contradiction 
or the need of any argument. It is the same principle that enters into 
the nature of the squirrel in storing up a little horde of nuts from 
the time he has an opportunity of getting them to the time of scarcity. 
It is the same principle that the farmer uses in putting his hay into 
his barn and feeding it out to his cattle when it is scarce, and grain 
also. There is nothing different in the fundamental principle of cold 
storage from the fundamental principle involved in the storage of any 
article. That is, warehouses are built with the best facilities for the 
storage of cotton, for grain, for wool, for groceries and other articles, 
and a cold-storage house is simply built in the best way possible for 
the preservation of the perishable articles. 

The working of cold storage may be illustrated most clearly 
in the case of eggs, butter and poultry. The season of abun- 
dant production of eggs covers three months in the spring, — 
March, April and May. Eggs laid in this time are superior in 
quality and have good keeping properties. Eggs produced in 
June, July and August are less adapted to storage, as they are 
much exposed to the heat before they can be put into storage. 
The eggs laid in March, April and May are stored, and are then 
available for consumption during the fall and winter months, 
when eggs are not produced in any considerable quantity. But- 
ter also is produced most plentifully in the cool spring months, 
when the grass is fresh and the cows are in the most healthy 
condition. Butter produced in May and June, the season of 
plenty, is stored, and later taken out for consumption in the win- 
ter months, the season of scarcity. Similarly, chickens are put 
on the market in large numbers in the fall, when chickens 
hatched in the spring and grown during the summer are slaugh- 
tered and dressed. The over-supply of chickens at this season 
is sent to the cold-storage warehouses, and there preserved for 
later sale during other seasons, when the supply of fresh poultry 
is cut off. 

The effect of cold storage on prices is in general to make 
them steadier, preventing extreme fluctuations, either upward 
or downward. The supply is reduced by the storing of products 
in time of plenty, and the price consequently does not fall so 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 179 

low. The supply is increased by the marketing of storage prod- 
ucts in time of scarcity, and the price consequently does not rise 
so high. It has been correctly stated by a representative of the 
cold-storage interests that : — 

Before cold-storage facilities were available, during- the time of 
plenty prices were extremely low for the producer. Conversely, dur- 
ing the season of scarcity prices rose rapidly and were extremely high 
to the consumer. Many classes of perishable products were not pro- 
curable, even at the extreme prices. The cold-storage warehouse acts 
as a balance. It insures that a fair supply of the products of plenty, 
produced in their seasons, shall be available throughout the year. It 
materially lessens the extreme between the former minimum and 
maximum selling prices, which is a decided advantage to both 
producer and consumer. 

Another beneficial effect of cold storage is to increase the pro- 
duction, and thus, of course, to lower the price of certain com- 
modities. It does this by extending the period over which per- 
ishable products can be marketed, and thus stimulating a larger 
volume of production. The operation of cold storage in in- 
creasing the volume of production of perishable goods is well 
explained by Frank G. Urner, editor of the New York " Prod- 
uce Review," in a report upon cold storage, as follows : — 

It is evident that if there are no means of preservation of a com- 
modity beyond the limited period of its production, so that all the 
product must be consumed within that period, the production of that 
commodity will, so far as inevitable variations permit, be limited to 
the amount that can be so disposed of at a price high enough to yield 
an average profit to the producer and to necessary distributing agencies. 
It is equally evident that if means of preservation of surplus are avail- 
able, so that the commodity may be sold to satisfy an effectual demand 
during a longer period, a larger quantity may be profitably produced, 
thus adding to the total food supply. Under natural conditions of 
trade, the tendency is therefore to increase production to the limit of 
quantity that can be profitably sold, not only during the season of pro- 
duction, — or greatest production, — but during the entire period of 
production and possible preservation. If this season of practical 
preservation extends to the following season of flush production, then 
it follows that the opportunity for profitable production has reached 
its maximum, and the tendency will be to produce the maximum quan- 
tity that can be consumed during the period at the lowest average 
price that will induce production. Considering these facts, it is quite 



180 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May ; 



evident that after the scale of production of a perishable article has 
been built up to a volume requiring a full year for its consumption 
at profitable prices, because of the development of facilities for pres- 
ervation during that period, any restriction of these facilities, by 
forcing the sale of the entire product during a shorter period, would 
first result in a lower price to producers during the season of flush 
production, and a higher price or an entire lack of offerings during 
the period of restriction; but second in a decrease of production to the 
quantity that could profitably be sold during the season of greatest 
production and restricted preservation. 



The variability in the production of the chief commodities 
of cold storage, which apart from this method of preservation 
must result in periodic shortage of supply and thus in reduced 
production over the entire period of a year, is shown by the 
statistics of the egg trade of New York and Boston 
are as follows : — 



The figures 





New York Egg Trade, 


Year ending February 28, 1910 




Months. 


Receipts 
(Cases). 


Cases 

in Storage 

First of 

Month. 


Storage 
Input or 
Output 
(Cases). 


Range 
of Prices, 

Fresh 

(Cents per 

Dozen). 


Prime 
Western 
Storage 
(Cents per 
Dozen) . 


1909. 
March, . 


516,141 


_ 


+ 38,000 


18% to 22J^ 


_ 


April, . 








636,423 


38,000 


+224,000 


20 to 25H 


- 


May, . 








603,583 


262,000 


+235,000 


20^ to 23H 


- 


June, . 








519,330 


497,000 


+193,000 


20H to 23M 


- 


July, . 








364,955 


690,000 


+ 37,000 


21 to 24 


- 


August, 








325,591 


727,000 


— 20,000 


21 to 26 


24^ to 2$y 2 


September, 








317,280 


707,000 


— 47,000 


22 to 27H 


24 to 26 


October, 








248,143 


660,000 


— 88,000 


24 to 30 


24 to 26 


November, 








177,350 


572,000 


—159,000 


26^ to 37 


22 to 26 


December, 








167,929 


413,000 


—185,000 


28 to 38 


21 to 2V/ 2 


3 
January, 


L910. 






137,408 


228,000 


—145,000 


32 to 42 


26 to 28 


February, . 






232,404 


83,000 


— 82,000 


24^ to 32 


23 to 27H 


Total an 


d av 


jrage 


3, 


4,246,537 


- 


- 


26 


24% 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



181 



Boston Egg Trade, Year ending February 28, 1910. 



Months. 


Receipts 
(Cases). 


Cases 

in Storage 

First of 

Month. 


Storage 
Input or 
Output 

(Cases). 


Range 
of Prices, 

Fresh 

(Cents per 

Dozen). 


Prime 
Western 
Storage 
(Cents per 
Dozen). 


March, 


L909. 


163,085 


_ 


+ 18,196 


22 to 27 


_ 


April, . 








221,295 


18,196 


+ 94,728 


20H to 25 


- 


May, . 








245,608 


112,924 


+125,054 


24 to 25 


- 


June, . 








196,810 


237,978 


+ 89,652 


243^ to 27 


- 


July, . 








114,573 


327,630 


+ 12,109 


27 to 32 


- 


August, 








105,124 


339,739 


— 7,554 


32 


24^ to 25^ 


September, 








93,742 


332,185 


— 26,942 


32 to 34 


24H to 25^ 


October, 








67,567 


305,243 


— 53,918 


34 to 45 


24M to 25H 


November, 








56,978 


251,325 


— 66,424 


44 to 50 


2Z]/ 2 to 25^ 


December, 








41,713 


184,901 


— 74,701 


43 to 48 


22Y 2 to 26 


1 
January, 


L910. 






25,074 


110,200 


— 74,446 


36 to 42 


25H to 27^ 


February, 








66,307 


35,754 


— 33,500 


28 to 36 


22H to 27 


Total an 


d av( 


;rage 


3, 


1,397,876 


- 


- 


33 


25 



The effect of cold storage on quality has been much discussed. 
It is difficult to make precise statements on this point. Un- 
doubtedly there takes place a change of flavor as a result of cold 
storage, but if the goods are properly handled there seems to be 
no serious danger to health. The effects of cold storage on 
quality differ widely for various commodities. Cheese, for ex- 
ample, can be successfully preserved without deterioration of 
quality for a considerable period of time. The storage period 
of butter is shorter ; that of eggs is shorter still. Dr. Harvey W. 
Wiley has stated that eggs can be properly preserved in cold 
storage for about nine months. The length of time in which 
poultry can be kept in satisfactory condition cannot be stated 
with any definiteness. 

The United States Department of Agriculture is conducting 
investigations, with a view to determining the effects of cold 
storage on different products and the normal period of storage. 
The results of these investigations when completed will doubt- 
less afford conclusive answers to the questions arising in this 
connection. A preliminary study of the effects of cold storage 



182 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

on eggs and chickens, by Dr. H. W. Wiley, Chief of the Bureau 
of Chemistry of the Department, was published in 1908. The 
results of this investigation, as summed up in the report, are 
as follows a : — 

The principal line of investigation reported, namely, on eggs, quail 
and chickens, conducted at Washington under known conditions of 
storage, and the more complete study of chickens stored under market 
conditions at Philadelphia, are summarized in the following pages,, 
brief reference also being made to the conclusions drawn from the 
milk investigation previously reported by Pennington. The general 
result of the organoleptic tests of the stored fowls and birds leads 
to the conclusion, first, that even after three months, before cooking,, 
it is not difficult to distinguish, by the appearance, color and odor, 
a freshly killed bird from the one that has been in cold storage. The 
shriveled condition of the eye and the skin and the generally dilapi- 
dated appearance of the bird are very significant and distinct. After 
cooking, however, within a period of three months, there is much dis- 
agreement on the part of the jurors respecting the proper classification 
thereof. This is especially true as to distinguishing between the 
drawn and undrawn birds, where the variations in judgment are of such 
a character as to lead to the belief that it is impossible, within that 
time, from the taste, odor and smell of the cooked bird, to determine 
which one had been drawn and which was undrawn at the time of 
storage. The possibilities of determining which is the fresh bird are 
very much greater, even after a lapse of three months, although occa- 
sional mistakes may be made in this respect also. At later dates, such 
as at the end of six months, nine months or twelve months, the differ- 
ence between the birds becomes more and more pronounced, so that 
it may with certainty be said that even after cooking one would rarely 
confound a fresh bird with one which had been in storage six months- 
At that date the flavor and the general character of the meat have so- 
deteriorated that it is not difficult to distinguish between the fresh 
and the stored fowl. Even at this date, however, there is some difficulty 
in distinguishing between the drawn and the undrawn bird. At the 
end of a year or more it would be quite impossible to make a mistake 
in most eases between the fresh and the stored birds. Summing up 
the organoleptic properties, it may be said that for a short time r 
possibly six weeks or even longer, there is no perceptible change pro- 
duced in a chicken by having it frozen. There certainly does not seem 
to be any evidence that it is better, and there is no convincing evidence 
that it is any worse. After three months, however, the fresh chicken 
is easily distinguished by its properties, as a rule, from the cold-storage 
chicken, even after cooking, and to an absolute certainty before cook- 

1 United States Department of Agriculture, Bulletin 115, pp. 99, 100. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 183 

ing. This distinction between the fresh and the stored bird becomes 
more and more marked as the time of storage is increased. In so far 
as the drawn and undrawn chicken are concerned, there is much less 
certainty of being able to distinguish between them. However, 70 per 
cent, of the jurors were able to pick out the undrawn bird by its 
stronger odor and taste after a storage period of from six to fifteen 
months; but at the test representing 18.5 months storage the two birds 
were about equally dry and tasteless. The general conclusion is, there- 
fore, that in the case of frozen birds there is no indication of any 
improvement in quality — that is, in taste, odor or flavor — during cold 
storage. There is a deterioration, which is noticeable even at the end 
of three months, and becomes more marked as the time of storage 
grows longer. Hence, without any reference whatever to the question 
of wholesomeness, cold storage prolonged for six months or more 
appears to be distinctly detrimental as far as taste, flavor and pala- 
tability are concerned. 

Dr. Mary E. Pennington of the Bureau of Chemistry of the 
Department of Agriculture published in 1907 a report of inves- 
tigations as to the effect of cold storage on poultry. The in- 
vestigation disclosed certain changes in the condition of poultry 
kept in cold storage for periods exceeding a few months. Dr. 
Pennington offered the following conclusion regarding the need 
of further investigation : — 

Considering the enormous growth and the wide extent of the refrig- 
eration of food stuffs, as well as the absolute lack of authoritative 
supervision of such frozen products before they are offered for sale, 
it seems most desirable that a careful study should be made, to deter- 
mine whether such alterations as have been noted affect the appearance 
and histological integrity of the flesh only, or whether, as has been 
asserted by some, the consumption of poultry after long periods of 
cold storage is not responsible for some of the obscure intestinal dis- 
orders and the imperfect metabolism from which modern humanity, 
especially dwellers in large cities, are so apt to suffer. 

In 1907 a report on poultry kept in cold storage was made 
by Dr. Herbert E. Brown for the Massachusetts State Board of 
Health. The general conclusions of this investigation were that 
poultry kept at temperatures ranging from +5° to — 14° 
Fahrenheit undergoes no decomposition as a result of bacterial 
activity ; that freezing temperatures as low as — 14 ° F. destroy 
a large percentage of the bacteria present, but will not affect the 



184 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

more resistant ones; that when the tissues are thawed they be- 
come moist by the melting of the ice crystals, and in this condi- 
tion bacterial growth is hastened and decomposition promoted; 
that undrawn chickens placed in cold storage show much smaller 
numbers of bacteria than drawn fowl; that under given con- 
ditions decomposition proceeds at a much more rapid rate in a 
thawed drawn chicken than in an undrawn one. 

These investigations are only partial, and have not settled 
conclusively the important questions arising in connection with 
the effects of cold storage upon quality of food products and on 
the public health. For definite answers to these questions one 
must wait until the investigations now in progress under the 
direction of the United States Department of Agriculture have 
been completed. 

The alleged abuses in the cold-storage handling of food prod- 
ucts are partly economic and partly sanitary. The economic 
abuse, as charged, consists in the speculative withdrawal of food 
products from the market, in order to force up prices. The san- 
itary abuse consists in the holding of goods for such period that 
their quality deteriorates, rendering them unfit for consumption. 
As measures of dealing with the two evils complained of, two 
proposals have been urged : first, that a time limit be placed upon 
the storage of food products; second, that storage goods be 
branded or marked in such way as to show the time of entry 
into storage and of withdrawal. The former proposal was ad- 
vocated by a committee of the Washington Chamber of Com- 
merce, which recently investigated the prices of commodities. 
A bill introduced in the Massachusetts Legislature this year, 
House, No. 979, would restrict the storage of food products to 
a period not exceeding six months. A bill recently introduced 
in the United States Senate by Senator Lodge, chairman of the 
National Committee on Wages and Prices of Commodities, Sen- 
ate, No. 7649, provides that any article of food held in cold 
storage for more than a year shall be deemed adulterated. 

This proposal of a fixed time limit for holding food products 
in cold storage is open to objections. No arbitrary limit could 
be set which would apply satisfactorily to all varieties of food, 
because the period during which they could be kept in satisfac- 
tory condition by cold storage varies greatly. The period of 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 185 

six months would be too short in the case of eggs, and would 
prevent holding eggs over the interval between the period of 
abundance, which ends with the month of May ; and the period 
of scarcity, which begins in November. A period of one year 
would not interfere seriously with the legitimate features of 
cold-storage business ; but, on the other hand, it would have no 
appreciable effect for good. In general, the business interest of 
dealers who place goods in cold storage may be depended upon 
to adjust the period of storage to the requirements of the con- 
suming public. Nothing whatever is to be gained by holding 
goods in storage for an undue period, until the goods become 
spoiled. So far as the price of cold-storage products is con- 
cerned, it would seem that the individuals engaged in the busi- 
ness of food distribution could be trusted to take goods out of 
storage at the time best suited to the needs of the consuming 
public. So far as the health question is concerned, any menace 
through the holding of goods for undue periods could be met 
by a system of inspection. 

The scheme of branding cold-storage products appears to be 
entirely impracticable. This plan is embodied in the second 
section of the Senate bill, which provides that articles of food 
held in cold storage shall bear a label plainly stating the period 
of time during which the article has been held in cold storage. 
Its difficulties are conspicuously evident in the case of eggs. It 
would be possible, of course, to brand the cases of eggs with the 
date of entry and removal, although even this would entail a 
considerable expense. But the eggs when taken from storage 
are usually handled and assorted by the jobber or the retailer. 
It is hard to see how the identity of each separate lot of eggs 
could be preserved during this process. If the eggs were not 
handled at all, and were sold in the original packages to the re- 
tailer, still the customer would not be able to identify a cold- 
storage egg, or know the time of storage, unless each egg were 
branded upon receipt into storage and upon withdrawal. It 
would require an enormous force of markers and branders to do 
this. Similar difficulties arise in the case of meat, which is 
stored in bulk and later cut in small portions for sale to con- 
sumers. In any event, the necessity of branding would add 
greatly to the expense of handling products in cold storage, and 



186 COST OF LIVING. [May 

must result in increased price of food to the consumer. It may 
be noted that Mayor Gaynor of New York recently vetoed, on 
the ground of constitutional and practical objections, a " tag- 
ging " ordinance passed by the board of aldermen. 

The suggestion has also been made that the operations of cold- 
storage companies should be restricted to a purely warehouse 
business. This means that they should not be permitted to own 
any of the goods which they handle. There seems to be no great 
need of enacting such a measure, for it is not the general prac- 
tice of cold-storage companies to buy and sell goods. They play 
a role analogous to that of the common carriers of goods, acting 
as public agencies for the storage of commodities owned by third 
parties. Moreover, any statute restricting their operations in. 
the proposed manner could be evaded with the greatest ease by 
arranging for the purchase and sale of goods through some out- 
side firm. The proposed restriction would be useless, if not. 
needless. 

In conclusion, it should be stated that the cold-storage estab- 
lishments are performing a useful and legitimate function in the 
distribution of food products. This fact was recognized by the 
Washington committee, to which reference has already been 
made, and by the Ohio Commission on the Cost of Living, which 
has just presented its report. The latter body characterized 
cold storage as a blessing, but recognized the possibility of abuses 
in this field, and recommended government regulation to pro- 
mote sanitation and prevent monopoly. Canada has subsidized 
cold-storage warehouses through an act of April, 1907. Fortu- 
nately, there is no need of adopting such a measure in this 
country. The cold-storage business in the United States has,, 
without government encouragement, reached large proportions. 
The amount invested in cold-storage business in Massachusetts 
is about $10,000,000. A single company in Boston operates 
seven cold-storage plants, with cooling space amounting to 
9,500,000 cubic feet. The business of the cold-storage com- 
panies appears to be conducted in an admirable manner. The 
greatest care is taken to adjust the temperature to the require- 
ments of the different commodities, to maintain the proper de- 
gree of moisture in the air, and to secure a free circulation of 
air between the boxes and crates in which the goods are stored. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 187 

Improvements in the processes of handling goods are constantly 
made, and the entire business is in a state of evolution or prog- 
ress. Mr. Utley, the president of the Quincy Cold Storage 
and Warehouse Company, states : — 

Our company, starting in a small way, has developed so that at the 
present time we cool more space than any other company in this 
country, and this means more than any company in the world. It has 
been to us a matter of some pride to feel that we have put Boston 
in the lead in this business. It has been a considerable factor, bene- 
ficial to the commerce of the city and State, and we feel, taking all 
into account, that we are deserving of a certain amount of considera- 
tion, — the same sort of consideration which any and all business 
interest is deserving of in the Commonwealth, that contributes by its 
activities to the general welfare, benefit and support of the community. 

This business certainly deserves fair treatment. That should 
go without saying. It would be fatuous and shameful to ham- 
per this enterprise by legislation prompted by the excitement at- 
tendant upon the recent advance of prices. 

Inspection of the cold-storage plants by the health authorities, 
State or local, would, however, impose no hardship on this busi- 
ness, and would protect the public against possible abuses. At 
present in the city of Boston there is no inspection of cold-stor- 
age plants whatever. Dr. Alexander Burr of the Boston Board 
of Health stated this fact in his testimony before the commis- 
sion : — 

Q. Do you inspect cold-storage articles? A. We do not. Q. You 
don't go into cold storage at all? A. No. Q. Is there any health in- 
spector in town that goes into cold storage? A. No cold storage, 
without it would be asked for. Q. What? A. No cold-storage inspec- 
tion, unless it is asked for. Q. Unless it is asked for ? A. And it might 
be in the way of some complaint; if there was a complaint made, it 
might be inspected. 

There seems, furthermore, to be some doubt as to the power 
of the health officials to inspect cold-storage plants without en- 
abling legislation. The commission is of the opinion that such 
legislation should be enacted, authorizing and requiring local 
boards of health to make regular inspection of cold-storage 
plants. 



188 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Another measure of protection for the public which com- 
mends itself to the judgment of the commission is a law pro- 
hibiting, under penalty, the sale of cold-storage articles as fresh 
goods. Such a measure would discourage a fraudulent prac- 
tice, which is harmful both to consumers and to honest dealers. 
The commission is aware that without the branding or marking 
of cold-storage goods, which is impracticable, the enforcement 
of such a prohibition would be difficult ; but its mere presence 
on the statute books would have a wholesome deterrent influ- 
ence. It would check, if it did not stop altogether, the false 
sale of cold-storage products. 

Ultimately, we believe, it will be found expedient to insti- 
tute a system of federal inspection of cold-storage warehouses. 
The greater part of cold-storage business is of an interstate char- 
acter, and can be controlled effectively and uniformly only 
through national legislation. A measure providing for national 
inspection of this business, without restriction as to time of 
storage or requirement as to branding goods, would appear to 
offer the best solution of this problem. Such legislation is not 
opposed by the cold-storage interests. Representatives of the 
American Warehousemen's Association, at a meeting held Feb- 
ruary 25, in Washington, adopted resolutions favoring federal 
inspection, as follows : — 

Resolved, That careless or conflicting legislation on the part of State 
or city can work much injury not only to the warehousemen, but to 
every one in any way connected with the production, sale or consump- 
tion of any perishable product which might be stored. That if legis- 
lation is necessary, it should take the form of national legislation, as 
its business is largely interstate, and uniformity is essential. That 
national legislation and supervision, based upon adequate investigation 
by the federal authorities as to its effect on prices of food products 
and the public health, and which would safeguard the interests of the 
public in an intelligent and logical manner, would receive the hearty 
co-operation of all cold-storage warehousemen. 



1910.1 HOUSE — No. 1750. 189 



V. 
GENERAL ANALYSIS AND CLASSIFICATION 



A. FACTORS THAT DETERMINE THE COST OF LIVING. 

The cost of living may be analyzed broadly as including : first, 
economic, normal or legitimate expenditures, or such as con- 
tribute to efficiency; second, uneconomic, abnormal or illegiti- 
mate expenditures, or such as do not contribute to efficiency. 
Obviously, the line between these two classes of expenditure 
cannot be drawn sharply and distinctly. Especially in the case 
of luxuries, it is impossible to lay down exact limits of economic 
expenditure. In general, however, it may be said that any 
expenditure which contributes to efficiency in the widest sense 
is economic. Everything beyond this must be regarded as un- 
economic. 

The chief items of expenditure in the first class are rent, 
food, clothing, fuel and light, and sundries, including outlay 
for health, recreation, amusement, education, religion and sup- 
port of government. The amount spent in taxation, regarded 
from the point of view of the individual citizen, is to be classed 
as an item of economic expenditure. Whether it should so be 
regarded, however, from the point of view of society in general, 
depends upon the degree of economy or of extravagance ex- 
hibited in the administration of the public finances. 

The second class of 'expenditures is made up of items of in- 
dividual and social wastage, which include excessive spending 
for legitimate objects and all expenditure for uneconomic pur- 
poses. Individual wastage embraces excessive expenditure for 
drink, luxury, amusement, and all expenditure for unjusti- 
fiable forms of consumption in general. The negative loss to 
the individual through inefficiency or idleness must also be 
reckoned here, as this reduces his income, and thus affects the 



190 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

relative cost of living, as determined by the ratio of expendi- 
ture to income. Social wastage includes cost of war, govern- 
mental extravagance, and the burden of crime, pauperism, in- 
sanity, accident, disease and unemployment. 

The cost of living, however, must be considered not only abso- 
lutely, as analyzed thus far, but relatively, as shown by the 
proportion of expenditures to earnings. Manifestly the level of 
prices, whether high or low, does not in itself measure the actual 
cost of living to individuals and families. It is of significance 
only in comparison with the amount of incomes. An advance 
of prices does not necessarily mean a proportionate increase of 
the actual cost of living. Its influence in this respect depends 
upon the movement of incomes in connection with prices. Ris- 
ing prices, if accompanied by increase of incomes, may mean 
reduced cost of living, as measured by the ratio of expenses to 
earnings. On the other hand, falling prices, if accompanied 
by diminution of incomes, may spell increased cost of living. 
In short, it is not the absolute level of prices that concerns the 
consumer, but the relative proportion of prices and incomes. 

Incomes include wages, salaries, earnings of business manage- 
ment, and returns on invested capital, whether as interest, divi- 
dends or rent. In connection with the amount of wages and 
salaries, the length of the working time must also be taken into 
account. The reduction of the working time, bringing a corre- 
sponding extension of leisure, is equivalent to an advance of real 
wages. On the other hand, the extent of unemployment must 
also be considered. An increase of the periods of involuntary 
idleness on the part of wage earners is synonymous with a re- 
duction of actual earnings. Both voluntary leisure and involun- 
tary idleness are to be considered in determining the actual 
significance of nominal rates of wages and salaries. 

The prices of commodities and services entering into economic 
expenditures, previously enumerated, are determined by three 
factors : supply, demand, and value of money. These three 
factors may be further analyzed as follows : — 

Supply depends on the expenses of production. The funda- 
mental factor here is the extent of the natural resources of the 
community or the country, especially the quantity and the 



1910.] HOUSE -No. 1750. 191 

quality of available land, the fertility of the soil and the 
u margin of production," as influenced by the existing state of 
agricultural science, methods and appliances. 

With regard to the rent of land and its relation to prices, it 
should be observed that the differential returns on land employed 
in production do not affect prices, in the sense of making them 
higher when such rents advance. Prices are determined in 
general by the cost of production on no-rent land. This is an 
accepted commonplace of economic theory. As production is 
forced down to lower levels of fertility or situation in the use of 
land, prices, as determined by the marginal expenses of pro- 
duction, advance. Then the rents of the more fertile or better- 
situated land rise. Thus, in general, high rents are an effect, 
not a cause, of high prices. But, while this is true of the 
differential returns on fertile or well-situated land, it is also 
true that the rent of the poorest land necessarily employed in 
production always appears in price. When no-rent land is all 
exhausted, the marginal land begins to bear rent, and this rent 
necessarily affects price. Thus the practical exhaustion of 
no-rent lands in this country has operated to advance prices. 

The ordinary competitive expenses of production include 
interest on capital, profits of management and cost of labor, as 
determined by the rate of wages, the length of the working day 
and the efficiency of labor. 

As modifying influences affecting the expenses of production, 
account must be taken of the influence of legislation in the 
form of labor codes, sanitary and food laws, and tariff acts. 
The effects of combination on the side of capital and of labor, 
the trusts and the unions, also enter into the determination of 
the expenses of production. Furthermore, the effects of social 
wastage form a negative element in the account. Here belong 
especially public and private extravagance, faulty organization 
and wasteful methods of production and distribution, especially 
needless duplication of capital, excessive numbers of middle- 
men, outlay for competitive advertising and the like. All 
waste of this kind becomes a charge upon prices. 

On the other hand, the positive effects of invention and 
improvement in the processes of production and distribution, 



192 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

through the development of new agencies of transportation and 
communication, and in other directions, must be considered as 
tending to reduce cost and increase supply. 

Demand depends on a combination of factors. The first 
element is the size and growth of the population, as governed 
by birth rate, death rate and immigration. The second factor 
is the amount of incomes received by the members of society. 
This factor also influences supply as well as demand. In pro- 
portion as wages and salaries are high or low, other things 
equal, the expenses of production on the side of supply and the 
extent of consumption on the side of demand will be great or 
small. The third factor is the standard of living. Here the 
effects of culture, custom, fashion and manners must be con- 
sidered. The requirements of the population, as influenced 
by the relative proportion of rural and urban inhabitants, 
are important here. The general habits of spending or saving 
also affect the demand for commodities and services in a very 
direct way. It should be observed that public and private 
extravagance in expenditure not only affects demand, but also 
influences supply. The latter is diminished either actually or 
potentially through destruction of wealth or waste of capital 
that might have been devoted to productive purposes. 

The value of money depends in general upon supply and 
demand of the money commodity. The value of gold, which has 
become the money commodity of the civilized nations, is the 
important element here. If the supply of gold is increasing, 
other things equal, its value will tend to depreciate, and con- 
versely. In addition to the supply of gold, inflation or con- 
traction of the currency is an element in determining prices on 
the side of money. Finally, the extension or reduction of credit 
has to be considered. 

Prices are the result of these complex forces operating from 
three sides: first, to extend or to diminish supply; second, to 
enlarge or reduce demand ; and third, to raise or lower the value 
of money in which values are measured and prices are expressed. 

The foregoing analysis may be outlined in tabular form as 
follows : — 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 193 



Tabular Outline of Factors that determine the Cost of Living. 
I. Cost of living includes: — 

1. Economic expenditures, or such as contribute to efficiency. 

2. Uneconomic expenditures, or such as do not contribute to 

efficiency. 
The chief items of expenditure in the first class are : — 

a. Rent. 

b. Food. 

c. Clothing. 

d. Fuel and light. 

e. Sundries, including outlay for health, recreation, amuse- 

ment, education, religion and government. 
The second class includes : — 

A. Individual wastage. 

a. Drink. 

b. Luxury. 

c. Amusement. 

d. Domestic waste. 

B. Social wastage. 

a. War. 

b. Governmental extravagance. 

c. Crime, pauperism, insanity, accident, disease, un- 

employment, and the Jike. 
II. The cost of living should be considered not only absolutely, as 
above, but relatively, as shown by proportion of expenditures 
to incomes : — 
a. Wages. 

e. Leisure. 
/. Idleness. 



b. Salaries, 

c. Profits, 

d. Interest. 
III. The prices of commodities and services that constitute the items of 

expenditure, classified above, are determined by supply, 
by demand and by value of money. 
1. Supply depends on expenses of production. 

a. Natural resources and marginal productivity of land. 

b. Ordinary competitive expenses: — 

(1) Interest on capital. 

(2) Profits of management. 

(3) Cost of labor, as determined by wages, hours and 

efficiency. 

c. Effects of legislation: — 

(1) Sanitary laws. 

(2) Food laws. 

(3) Labor Laws. 

(4) Tariff laws. 



194 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

III. The prices of commodities, etc. — Concluded. 

1. Supply depends on expenses of production — Concluded. 

d. Effects of combination. 

(1) Capital, — trusts. 

(2) Labor, — unions. 

e. Effects of wastage : — 

(1) Public and private extravagance. 

(2) Planless and wasteful methods of production and 

distribution. 
/. Effects of improvements and inventions. 

2. Demand depends on: — 

or. Size and growth of population, as governed by birth rate, 
death rate, immigration. 

b. Amount of incomes. 

c. Standard of living, as influenced by advance of culture, 

growth of cities, custom and fashion, habits of spending 
and saving. 

3. Value of money depends on: — 

a. Supply of gold. 

b. Currency system. 

c. Use of credit. 

B. CAUSES OF INCREASE OF COST OF LIVING. 

On the basis of the foregoing analysis of the factors that 
enter into the determination of the cost of living, we may 
proceed to classify the causes that have brought about the recent 
advance of prices. These causes fall into two main groups: 
First, increase of uneconomic expenditures, through waste, de- 
struction and general extravagance ; second, increase of economic 
expenditures, brought about by rise of prices. 

The chief items in the increase of uneconomic expenditures 
are enlarged outlay for war and national armaments, higher 
scale of governmental expenditure in general, and cost of the 
burden of crime, pauperism, insanity, accident, disease, unem- 
ployment and other forms of social wastage. These are all items 
of public and social expenditure. Meanwhile, also, individual 
expenditure of an uneconomic character has increased, includ- 
ing outlay for drink, luxury, amusement and wasteful or injuri- 
ous forms of consumption. 

The factors that have contributed to bring about an advance 
of prices, and a consequent expansion of necessary expendi- 



1910.] . HOUSE — No. 1750. 195 

tnre, fall into three main groups: influences affecting the 
supply of commodities and services ; changes in the demand of 
consumers; and fall of the value of money. Obviously, there 
are only three ways in which any particular influence can 
operate to bring about an advance of prices: it must either 
affect supply, restricting it or making production more expen- 
sive ; or it must act upon demand, extending the consumption of 
goods ; or it must alter the money standard in which values are 
measured and prices are expressed, causing it to depreciate. 
During the last decade a variety of forces have worked upon 
prices through these three channels, tending to diminish supply, 
to increase demand and to reduce the value of money. The 
resultant of these combined influences is expressed in the higher 
index numbers of general prices in all countries of the world. 

The main influences that have worked to restrict supply are 
the drain of population from the land, resulting in decreasing 
the proportion of persons engaged in agricultural production; 
the exhaustion of natural resources, resulting in increasing- 
expenses of production or diminishing returns to capital and 
labor; and wasteful methods of production and distribution, 
especially the latter. Of particular importance in the field 
of economic waste are needless multiplication of middlemen and 
of charges in the passage of commodities from the source of 
supply to the door of the consumer; excessive expenditure for 
advertising purposes; adulteration and debasement of quality; 
and distribution of foods in packages, involving in many cases 
short weight and high cost. The influence of the tariff, that of 
the trusts and that of the labor unions must be considered 
here as possible factors in the advance of prices. Also, the 
development of legislation for the control of production and 
distribution, in the shape of sanitary requirements, pure food 
laws, and labor codes is a factor of considerable importance. 

The changes in reference to demand have come about through 
the growth and concentration of the population in cities, the 
general advance of the standard of living, bringing larger re- 
quirements on the part of the individual consumer, and the 
national tendency toward extravagant expenditure. The last 
influence works in two ways to advance prices: it not only in- 



196 COST OF LIVING. . [May, 

creases demand, but it also reduces supply, through the total 
destruction or partial utilization of goods. 

Finally, the fall in the value of money has been brought 
about by the great increase of the gold supply, the inflation of 
the currency through the issue of paper money in various forms, 
and the extension of credit in general. As the supply of money 
increases, the value of the unit or standard must fall, other 
things being equal. In other words, the measure of value 
shrinks as the money commodity becomes more abundant, and 
the result is expressed in advanced prices. The extension of 
credit operates to diminish the demand for gold, and in some 
cases to increase the utility or effectiveness of the money supply, 
tending thus to reduce its value in two ways. Apart from the 
general influence of the enlarged supply of money in raising 
prices, an increase of the gold supply works upon prices in a 
very direct and potent way. The gold is exchanged for certifi- 
cates, and the certificates are deposited in banks, becoming 
reserves. On the basis of these reserves the banks extend their 
loans, money becomes easy, business is stimulated, and prices 
are affected immediately and powerfully. 

The operation of these various factors in the recent advance 
of prices will be examined in detail in the following chapters 
of this report. 

The classification of the causes of the cost of living thus 
presented may be outlined in tabular form as follows : — 

I. Increase of uneconomic expenditures: — 

1. Social wastage. 

a. War and national armaments. o 

b. Higher scale of governmental expenditure. ^ 

c. Increasing cost of burden of crime, pauperism, insanity, 

accident, disease, unemployment and the like. 

2. Individual wastage. 

a. Drink. 

b. Luxury. 

c. Amusement. 

d. Domestic waste. 

II. Increase of economic expenditures in consequence of higher prices. 
The causes of the advance of prices may be classed as: — 
1 . Changes in supply. 

a. Drain of population from the land. 

b. Exhaustion of natural resources. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 197 

II. Increase of economic expenditures, etc. — Concluded. 

1. Changes in supply — Concluded. 

c. Wasteful methods of production and distribution. 

(1) Transportation. 

(2) Wholesale and retail costs. 

(3) Advertising. 

(4) Adulteration. 

(5) Package foods. 

d. Tariff. 

e. Trusts. 

/. Labor unions. 
g. Legislation. 

(1) Sanitary laws. 

(2) Pure food laws. 

(3) Labor laws. 

2. Changes in demand. 

a. Growth and urban concentration of population. 

b. General advance of standard of living. 

c. Extravagance in expenditure. 

3. Changes in value of money. , 

a. Increase of gold supply. 

b. Inflation of currency. 

c. Extension of credit. 



198 COST OF LIVING. [May, 



VI. 

SOCIAL WASTAGE. 



A. WAR. 



In weighing the causes that have contributed to increase the 
cost of living, this commission is convinced that a most far- 
reaching influence in creating, fostering and perpetuating high 
prices is militarism, with its incidents of war and waste and 
its consequences in taxation. The three great wars of the last 
decade and a half — the British-Boer, the Spanish- American 
and the Russo-Japanese — took millions of men out of the 
productive activities of our civilization into the wasteful activi- 
ties of warfare, diverted the energies of other millions from 
useful industry in shop and mill and farm, and transferred 
their skill and labor to the production of war equipment, mate- 
rial, food and supplies for the armies in the field. This diver- 
sion of labor and capital from productive industry to waste and 
destruction, with the accompanying diminution of the neces- 
saries of life and an inability to supply the world's demands, 
inevitably resulted in an advance of the prices of the commodi- 
ties of common consumption. 

In addition to these conditions, and incidental to them, the 
mania for militarism leads nations to plunge into debt in order 
to create and maintain armies that may never fight and navies 
that may never fire a hostile shot. This mania has piled up 
huge financial burdens in England, Germany, France and other 
foreign countries, for meeting which the best energies of their 
statesmen are diverted to devise new methods of taxation. In 
the United States, as in Europe, the exactions of militarism 
and its burdens of a debt that gives opportunity to use the 
necessity to raise revenue for selfish purposes, are prime factors 
in the economic waste that has produced high prices. This 



1910.] HOUSE 4 — No. 1750. 199 

commission does not care to discuss the philosophy of militarism. 
It simply desires to show that war in all its phases is one of the 
most serious influences in producing present high prices. 

The term " militarism " includes all that enters into the 
creation, organization and preparation of armies and navies, 
as well as the actual warfare for which they are designed. The 
question of national defence, its wisdom or unwisdom, we need 
not discuss at this point; we are concerned only with its ex- 
istence, its influence on our economic activities, its cost to the 
nation, and its part in bringing about the conditions now under 
discussion. 

As showing the enormous demands that militarism makes 
upon resources, let us first note the comparative expenditures 
of the national treasury for the thirty-one years from 1879 to 
1909. The figures are given both in amounts and in percentages 
of national revenue, as follows : — 

Army, $2,465,096,479 = 20.2 per cent. 

Navy, 1,456,795,867 = 11.9 per cent. 

Pensions, 3,499,883,832 = 28.7 per cent. 

Interest, 1,309,026,795 = 10.7 per cent. 



Total, $12,210,499,778 = 71.5 per cent. 

The balance of the national income for those thirty-one years, 
amounting to $3,479,696,805, or 28.5 per cent, of the whole, 
was spent upon the civil administration of national affairs, 
Indians, legislation, law, justice, customs service, and all other 
miscellaneous activities of the nation. 

Thus, during this period 71.5 per cent, of the nation's in- 
come, almost three dollars out of every four of revenue, was 
spent on the destructive agencies of war, for the interest paid 
on the debts contracted for warlike purposes, and in pensions to 
the victims of war, — the army of surviving economic ineffi- 
cients created by war. 

The national debt of the United States is a monument to our 
past wars, and is as follows : — 



200 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



National Debt of the United States, November 1, 1909. 

1. Debt bearing interest, - $913,317,490.00 

2. Debt interest ceased, 2,686,895.26 

3. Debt non-interest-bearing, 379,143,046.78 



Total, $1,295,147,432.04 

4. Treasury notes and other paper currency, secured 
by cash in the treasury, which may be regarded 
rather as a public convenience than a public 
debt, $1,366,277,869.00 

Eliminating the nominal debt indicated by notes and paper 
currency in circulation, with other credits, and assuming the 
population of the United States to be 94,000,000, the per capita 
debt would amount to almost exactly $10.00. 

In addition, there are debts of the States, counties and cities 
of the country, about 25 per cent, at least of which may be 
assumed to have been the contribution of the States to national 
militarism, the rest of the debt being supposedly for improve- 
ments representing economic values. These debts represent 
an average per capita of $22.40, which added to the national 
per capita, yields a total debt of $36.80 per capita. The table 
follows : — 



Indebtedness of Cities, Counties and States, by Groups of States. 





Group. 


Indebtedness. 


Per Capita. 


North Atlantic States, 


$946,604,780 


$37.28 


South Atlantic States, . 


159,834,215 


22.10 


North Central States 


468,862,168 


14.17 


South Central States, 


173,776,068 


16.14 


Western Division States 


115,118,595 


13.85 


Totals 


$1,864,195,826 


$22.40 



In the one hundred and twenty-six years of our national 
existence, besides the war of the rebellion, we have had wars 
with three foreign powers — England, Mexico, and Spain. 
Whether or not any or all of these wars were preventable is a 
matter of merely academic interest at this time. Though they 
covered only six years of our national life, and the rebellion 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 201 

four, these ten years were responsible for our huge debts. It is 
worth recalling that during the life of the republic we have 
spent for all purposes the sum of $21,518,871,351, and of this 
amount $16,567,677,135 was devoted to militarism and its in- 
cidents and only $4,951,194,216 to the activities of peace. It is 
particularly worthy of note that the money spent on militarism 
by this republic in the one hundred and twenty-six years of its 
political life, $16,567,677,135, exceeds the gold production of 
the world since the discovery of America — thirteen and a half 
billions of dollars — by three billions. These figures are im- 
pressive. 

In spite of our natural strategic advantages, our continental 
isolation and practical economic independence, the United States 
has multiplied its expenditures for national defence two hundred 
times during a period when our population has increased only 
twenty-two times and our coast line lengthened three times. 
Our danger from attack has not increased ; our wealth, numbers 
and other circumstances would imply that it has diminished; 
and yet we are spending more for defence than France, only 
about $36,000,000 annually less than Germany, and $66,000,000 
less than England, — countries lying at the very heart of 
militarism, and all dependent on imports for part of their food 
supplies. 

We cannot, in view of these considerations, escape the fact 
that militarism is a cause of enormous waste in this age. Its 
world-wide existence and character make it the most difficult of 
all problems to solve, just as the logic upon which its existence 
is based is the most intractable to combat and controvert. Na- 
tional honor and safety are the catchwords of a system that 
is bleeding the world to death; the former, shadowy though it 
may be, is more in evidence abroad than at home; and so far 
in the life of the republic the latter has been jeoparded more 
frequently by our inhabitants than by foreign foes. Neverthe- 
less, the bogey of foreign aggression and invasion is periodically 
invoked to bolster up the system of militarism, whenever it 
appears to need support and whenever the appropriations do not 
meet the desires of those whose economic existence depends upon 
the production of the instrumentalities of war and waste. 
The following figures, covering the period from 1793 to date. 



202 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



one hundred and seventeen years, incomplete as they are, make 
an impressive exhibit of the waste of life and treasure that 
militarism has brought to civilization: — 



Wars and their Cost. 



Dates. 


Countries engaged. 


Cost. 


Loss 
of Life. 


Armies 
in the 
Field. 


1793-1815, . 


England and France, .... 


$6,250,000,000 


1,900,000 


3,000,000 


1812-1815, 




France and Russia, . . . 


450,625,000 


- 


1,500,000 


1828, . 




Russia and Turkey, .... 


100,000,000 


120,000 


- 


1830-1840, 




Spain and Portugal (civil war), 


250,000,000 


160,000 


300,000 


1830-1847, 




France and Algeria, .... 


190,000,000 


110,000 


150,000 


1848, . 




Revolts in Europe 


50,000,000 


60,000 


- 


1845, . 




United States and Mexico, 


- 


10,000 


90,100 






England 


371,000,000 










France 


332,000,000 






1854-1856, . 




Sardinia and Turkey, 

Austria, ...... 

Russia, . . ... 


128,000,000 

68,600,000 

800,000,000 


■ 609,797 


1,460,500 






France, 


75,000,000 


24,000 


128,000 


1859, . 




Austria, 


127,000,000 


- 


200,000 






Italy, . 


51,000,000 


. - 


50,000 


1861-1865, . 


The rebellion, ..... 


5,000,000,000 


f 294,400 
I 200,000 


2,041,600 
750,000 


1864, . 


Denmark, Prussia and Austria, 


36,000,000 


- 


- 


1866, . 


Prussia and Austria, .... 


330,000,000 


57,000 


639,000 


1864-1870, . 


Brazil, Argentine and Paraguay, 


240,000,000 


330,000 


- 


1865-1866, . 


France and Mexico 


65,000,000 


65,000 


100,000 


1870-1871, . J 


France, 

Germany, 


1,580,000,000 
954,400,006 


311,000 


1,713,000 


1876-1877, . 


Russia, 

Turkey 


806,547,489 
403,273,745 


\ 180,000 

J 


1,500,000 


1898, . 


Spain and the United States, 


1,165,000,000 


20,000 


300,000 


1900-1901, . 


Transvaal Republic and England, . 


1,000,100,000 


91,000 


400,000 


1904-1905, . 


Russia and Japan, .... 


2,500,000,000 


555,900 


2,500,000 



Expense of wars, 1793-1860, 
Expense of wars, 1861-1910, 



Total, 



Loss of life, military service, 
Armies in the field, . 



$9,243,225,000 
14,080,321,240 

$23,323,546,240 

5,098,097 
16,822,200 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



203 



The figures are estimates, but estimates by trained scholars 
and statisticians ; and they can, after all, represent only a small 
part of the loss of life and treasure. 

The cost of the Napoleonic invasion of Kussia in 1812, and 
the subsequent wars which ended in the overthrow of the Em- 
peror of the French, are from figures given by Jean S. Bloch, 
snd cover only the actual loans, issues of paper " assignats " to 
meet military expenses, and the English subsidies paid to Russia. 
The destruction of Moscow and the enormous waste in other 
directions are not calculated. 

The waste and the loss which the Napoleonic era, including 
the French revolutionary, directory and consular wars, inflicted 
on Italy, the Netherlands, the German kingdoms and principali- 
ties, Spain, Portugal and Egypt, have not been estimated; but 
economically, financially and humanly they must have been 
enormous. Leroy Beaulieu states that the age of the revolution 
and the empire cost France $4,200,000,000; and up to the year 
1799 her loss of men amounted to 1,500,000. 

When the French revolution became successful, the enormous 
public debt of France, in the neighborhood of a billion dollars, 
was wiped off the slate, ruining thousands who had invested in 
good faith, counting on the permanency of the French mon- 
archy. The new rulers were wasteful and careless, and ruined 
trade and commerce for a time by war and financial ignorance. 
Napoleon brought order out of chaos, but his ceaseless warfare 
piled up debts. The public debt kept on increasing by leaps and 
bounds, mainly through militarism and war. Thus the French 
national public debt was, in — 



1852, .... 


$1,103,200,000 


1871, .... 


2,490,800,000 


1876, .... 


3,981,800,000 


1895, . 


5,193,600,000 


1906, .... 


5,665,134,825 



It is worthy of remark that at the outbreak of the French 
revolution France was paying out 80 per cent, of her income 
for military purposes and the debts contracted for wars. The 
French and Indian seven years' war cost France $472,000,000, 
and the war of American independence, waged for the colonies 



204 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



and against England, cost nearly as much, and eventually 
destroyed the monarchy. 

The enormous national debt of England has been piled up 
almost exclusively by the constant wars, great and small, in 
which she has been engaged. The growth of this debt from its 
inception to date is interesting economically ; it began, in Eng- 
land, practically with the establishment of a standing army of 
■a permanent character. The following short table of English 
wars and debts is significant : — 



1689. After expulsion of James II., . 

1713. After war of Spanish succession, 

1743. After war of Austrian succession, 

1756. After French and Indian war, . 

1783. After American revolution, 

1793. After ten years of peace, . 

1816. After Napoleonic wars, 



$5,270,000 

268,400,000 

390,000,000 

697,500,000 

1,190,000,000 

1,140,000,000 

4,380,000,000 



The fact that in 1814 France was paying a sum of only 
$12,600,000 per annum in interest on her debt, while England 
was paying $160,000,000, is interesting not only as showing 
a higher financial skill by Napoleon in conducting his operations, 
but also as throwing a great light on the losses that must have 
come to the countries defeated and conquered by Napoleon, who 
made the conquered, where possible, pay the expenses and armies 
of the conqueror. Europe was destroying her resources and 
population ; England was saved from bankruptcy by having the 
world on which to draw. 

In 1800, while the ordinary administrative civil expenditures 
of this republic amounted to only $1,330,000, the expenditures 
for pensions and naval and military purposes reached the sum 
of $9,470,000. The country's debt in 1812 was about $45,200,- 
000, but by the time the war with England closed, it had 
been run up to $127,300,000. The country then settled down 
to the ways of peace, industry and trade in a national sense, 
our only trouble being petty Indian outbreaks, so that by the 
time of the Mexican war the national debt had been paid off. 

The expenses of the government have since been constantly 
increasing; but, although the extension of territorial settlement 
and the increase of population would have entailed increased 
expenses in the administration of public affairs, the largest item 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



205 



of expense has always been for military affairs, army and navy. 
The war of the rebellion, with its waste and loss, may have 
been preventable; we are to look at that tremendous contest 
simply from its economic side. Its effects on every phase of 
American life were far-reaching, and on none so impressive as 
on the economic side. Five years after its close, the United 
States, in 1870, as a result of it, was paying out in interest 
charges alone twice as much as the whole cost of the government 
in 1860. Prior to the rebellion the budget of the army and navy 
amounted to $27,980,000, and, though the vast armies that had 
carried on the struggle had vanished and were absorbed into 
civil life, the army and navy in 1870 cost the country 
$79,430,000. 

The following table of the indebtedness of the principal 
European countries and their dependencies is an impressive 
showing of the enormous capital taken from productive industry 
and the work of civilization and wasted in death and destruc- 
tion. The debt thus piled up for war and waste remains a 
burden on the life of the world, — a burden calling every year 
for a huge interest payment of more than a billion dollars taken 
from the earnings of the nations. This is supplemented annu- 
ally by many other billions to maintain huge armies and navies 
of men taken from industry, who are organized, trained and 
maintained for the day when they will again be hurled at each 
other, to duplicate the destruction of the past, and pile up new 
and heavier burdens upon the thrift and industry of the world. 



Indebtedness of Nations, with Amount of Interest Payments, Computed 
up to the Year 1906. 



Country. 


National Debt. 


Annual Interest 
Payments. 


Austria-Hungary 


SI, 092,863,255 


$48,214,794 


Belgium, 


621,640,286 


24,925,694 


Denmark, 


64,231,713 


2,197,120 


France, 


5,655,134,825 


237,855,497 


French Algiers, 


6,323,838 


737,440 


German Empire, 


855,963,454 


30,358,300 


German States, 


2,957,356,846 


120,537,100 


Netherlands 


458,069,211 


14,718,505 


Portugal 


864,701,627 


21,369,000 


Roumania, 


278,249,239 


16,086,604 


Russia, 


4,038,199,722 


172,385,884 


Russia, Finland 


27,073,900 


1,205,734 


Switzerland, ... 


19,787,648 


1,037,642 


Turkey 


458,603,213 


9,499,450 


United Kingdom, . 


3,839,620,745 


150,295,210 


British Colonies, . • . 


612,510,084 


22,802,418 


Spain, .... 


1,899,265,995 


69,256,706 


Italy 


2,767,911,940 


190,803,281 


Totals 


$26,517,504,541 


$1,134,296,179 



206 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



The table of prices computed by Prof. Eoland P. Falkner 
for the Aldrich report shows that the prices of food during the 
Mexican war period jumped about 8 per cent. During the 
Crimean war, when the wheat and grain markets of Russia 
were closed and exportation except by land practically stopped, 
food prices in 1853 went up 14 per cent, and in 1854 20 per 
cent, above those of 1852, while cloths and clothing advanced 
about 12 per cent. 

In 1855 and 1856 the advance in food prices over 1852 was 
25 per cent. ; and in 1857, a year of panic and industrial and 
business disturbance, prices rose again to 30 per cent, above the 
year preceding the Crimean war. Prices dropped back again 
in 1858 and in 1859, but never to the 1852 standard. The 
level in 1860 was the normal, below which the 1861 prices 
dropped 5 per cent. Then came the war of the rebellion, with 
its waste, the sealing up of the south and its elimination from 
the economic life of the country, — an era of vast borrowings 
and expenditures for purposes and materials that meant eco- 
nomic waste on a huge scale, disturbance of agriculture and 
destruction of the American marine and foreign commerce, 
the removal from all economic production of large armies of 
men, and the displacement of other armies of workers to supply 
their needs. To these were added the practical disappearance 
of gold as a circulating medium, and the introduction of a de- 
preciated currency. These evils were capped by a stoppage of 
immigration and a cessation of the opening up and productive 
settlement of our western lands. 
K. Relatively to 1860, the normal year, the advances of prices of 
food and clothing were : — 



Year. 


Food. 


Clothing. 


Year. 


Food. 


Clothing. 


1862 


10.4 


24.1 


1867, .... 


63.9 


79.9 


1863 


33.0 


91.6 


1868 


64.2 


46.8 


1864, . . . ■ . 


65.8 


160.7 


1869, .... 


62.9 


47.5 


1865, .... 


116.5 


199.2 


1870 


53.8 


39.4 


1886 


73.6 


126.6 


1871 


69.3 


33.3 



In those years food products were bought, sold and paid for 
in the depreciated currency of the day. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 207 

In 1879, 1885, and 1886 food prices dropped below the 
normal of 1860, and clothing, except in 1880, was cheaper down 
to 1891 than before the war; but food prices never went back to 
ante bellum rates. Industrial America developed more rapidly 
than pastoral and agricultural America during the 70's and 80's. 

In 1900 Professor Falkner prepared tables of wholesale 
prices, based on the average of the nine quarterly prices from 
January, 1890, to January, 1892, which were used as the 
normal. The period covered was from January, 1890, to July, 
3 899, practically a period of peace, accompanied by a great 
agricultural and grain-growing development; a gradual decay 
or restriction of cattle ranching, incident to the occupation of 
homesteads by settlers; and the economic organization of the 
packing and canning business controlling the meat supplies. 
The prices of food, clothing, fuel and building materials during 
this decade show in wholesale prices a fairly level condition. 
The highest prices of foods were in April, 1891, when they were 
1.8 per cent, above normal; the lowest in July, 1896, when 
they were 25 per cent, below normal, — doubtless the result of 
great harvests at home and abroad, and of the slow recovery 
from the industrial depression that had prevailed for several 
years. In 1896 was reached substantially the low limit of the 
recession of prices that began in 1873. In 1897 the upward 
tendency of prices began, as is shown elsewhere in this report. 
This tendency took on. new momentum when the Spanish- 
American war broke out in the following year. High price con- 
ditions were stimulated by the scarcity and artificial demand 
induced by that outbreak and by the British-Boer and Eusso- 
Japanese conflicts, which came in rapid succession. 



208 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



B. COST OF GOVERNMENT. 

The relation of the cost of government to the increase of the 
cost of living is best shown by the following tables : — 



Classified Expenditures of the United States, 1908. 



Objects. 


Per Capita. 


Per Family. 


Legislative, 


$0,157 


$0,785 


Executive 


.005 


.025 


State, . 


.043 


.215 


Treasury, 


.872 


4.360 


Interest on public debt, 


.246 


1.230 


War 


1.620 


8.100 


Navy, 


1.357 


6.785 


Interior, 


.452 


2.260 


Pensions, 


1.765 


8.825 


Post-office 


2.363 


11.815 


Agriculture, 


.154 


.770 


Commerce and labor, 


.170 


.850 


Justice and judicial 


.104 


.520 


Panama Canal 


.414 


2.070 




$9,722 


$48,610 



Net Disbursements of the United States, by Years. 



Year. 


Per 

Capita. 


Per 

Family. 


Year. 


Per 

Capita. 


Per 
Family. 


1878, 


$4.98 


$24.90 


1902, . 


$5.96 


$29.80 


1886 










4.221 


21.10 


1903, 






6.26 


31.30 


1896 










5.01 


25.05 


1904, 






6.50 


32.50 


1897 










5.10 


25.50 


1905, 






6.77 


33.85 


1898 










6.07 


30.35 


1906, 






6.49 


32.45 


1899 










8.142 


40.70 


1907, 






6.41 


32.05 


1900 










6.39 


31.95 


1908, 






7.10 


35.50 


1901 










6.56 


32.80 


1909, 






7.45 


37.25 



1 Lowest since the civil war. 



2 Effect of war with Spain. 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



209 



Classified Expenditures of Massachusetts, by Years. 



Objects. 


1880. 


1890. 


1900. 


1909. 


Legislative department, 


SO. 109 


$0,141 


$0,125 


$0,106 


Executive and other departments, .... 


.049 


.053 


.057 


.063 


State House, 


.022 


.057 


.040 


.045 


Printing other than legislative, 


.027 


.055 


.053 


.033 


Judiciary, 


.085 


.095 


.131 


.159 


Commissions and boards, 


.042 


.109 


.200 


.298 


Agricultural, including Cattle Bureau and expenses of 


.012 


.038 


.056 


.186 


the gypsy and brown-tail moth department. 










Charitable, 


.241 


.252 


.396 


1.130 


Educational, including State Library, 


.044 


.061 


.195 


.316 


Military 


.136 


.101 


.117 


.145 


State and military aid and other war expenses, 


.228 


.226 


.308 


.314 


Reformatory and correctional, 


.188 


.262 


.300 


.382 


Public buildings, 


.019 


.236 


.129 


.128 


Sinking funds, etc., 


.000 


.027 


.096 


.132 


Interest, . . 


.945 


.680 


.850 


.344 


Miscellaneous 


.015 


.039 


.069 


.131 


Totals, 


$2,162 


$2,432 


$3,122 


$3,912 


Real estate, etc., the property of the Commonwealth, 


$4.691 ! 


$5,375 


$8,234 


$11.766 2 



1 Five normal school establishments were not included in the 1880 report. The Troy & Green- 
field Railroad and Hoosac Tunnel item is here omitted, for the sake of comparison. 

2 1908. 

In the preparation of this table, the details of the earlier 
years have been reclassified to conform to the apportionment 
now made in the Auditor's reports. 

The recent increase in the " Charitable " item, it should be 
remembered, is largely due to the taking over by the Common- 
wealth, from the cities and towns, of the support of the insane 
poor. 

Expenditures of the 83 Cities of Massachusetts, 1906} 



Objects. 


Per Capita. 


Per Family. 


Education, . 


$4.97 


$24.85 


Highways and bridges, 


3.65 


18.25 


Municipal industries (water, gas, electricity, markets, etc.), . 


3.17 


15.85 


Police department, 


1.79 


8.95 


Fire department, 


1.56 


7.80 


General administration, 


1.35 


6.75 


Sewers, etc., 


1.30 


6.50 


Charities and corrections, . • . 


1.08 


5.40 


Recreation (including metropolitan and other parks), 


.87 


4.35 


Libraries and reading rooms, 


.36 


1.80 


Conservation of public health (hospitals, etc.), 


.30 


1.50 


Cemetery , . 


.16 


.80 


Inspection departments, 


.14 


.70 


Benefit of soldiers, 


.14 


.70 


Fire and police alarms, 


.11 


.55 


Militia and armories, . 


.06 


30 


Debt payments, 


3.06 


15.30 


County expenses 


.68 


3.40 




$24 . 75 


$123.75 



Population, 2,066,913. Inasmuch as debt payments are on account of the various depart- 
ments, it may not be said that the cost of any one department is completely shown by the figures 
against it. Furthermore, some county expenses are classified elsewhere than under the special 
heading. 



210 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May. 



Total Expenditures for State and Local Government, 


Massachusetts. 


Year. 


Income of 
. the 

Common- 
wealth. 

1 


Amount 
raised by 
Taxation 

for 

Municipal 

and County 

Purposes . 


Total 
Amount raised 
for 
Govern- 
mental 
Purposes. 


Popula- 
tion. l 


Per 
Capita Ex- 
penditure 

for 
Govern- 
mental 
Purposes. 


1870, 


$4,972,544.10 


$19,422,569 


$24,395,113.10 


1,457,351 


$16,742 


1880, 








6,758,649.84 


22,826,612 


29,585,261.84 


1,783,085 


12.56 


1890, 










5,506,625.08 


29,753,666 


35,260,291.08 


2,238,943 


15.75 


1900, 










6,541,205.15 


46,414,058 


52,955,263.15 


2,805,346 


18.88 


1901, 










7,333,401.44 


47,653,016 


54,986,417.44 


2,845,013 


19.33 


1902, 










7,114,579.18 


49,327,713 


56,442,292.18 


2,884,680 


19.56 


1903, 










8,282,025.69 


50,339,917 


58,621,942.69 


2,924,347 


20.05 


1904, 










8,521,281.29 


51,848,769 


60,370,050.29 


2,964,013 


20.37 


1905, 










10,382,853.92 


53,476,660 


63,859,513.92 


3,003,680 


21.21 


1906, 










10,147,956.68 


54,393,335 


64,541,391.68 


3,059,298 


21.10 


1907, 










10,664,878.89 


55,938,910 


66,603,788.89 


3,127,706 


21.29 


1908, 










12,390,964.02 


58,546,487 


70,937,451.02 


3,192,192 


22.22 


1909, 










12,194,776.10 


60,881,747 


73,076,523.10 


3,258,413 


22.43 



1 The population figures for the years 1870, 1880, 1890 and 1900 were taken from the United 
States census reports, and for the year 1905 from the reports of the Massachusetts census. The 
other years are estimates: 1906-09 inclusive are the estimates of the Massachusetts Bureau of Sta- 
tistics; 1904 is the estimate of the United States Bureau of the Census, contained in Bulletin 71. 
The years 1901, 1902 and 1903 were computed on the same basis, namely, the addition each year 
of the average increase from 1900 to 1905. 

2 The per capita expenditure in 1870 would have been $13.58 in gold. 



Total Cost 


of Government 


to 


City Dwellers. 






Per Capita. 


Per Family. 


For national government, 1908, 
For State government, 1909,. 
For municipal government, 1906, 








$9,722 

3.912 

24.750 


$48,610 

19.560 

123.750 




$38,384 


$191,920 



It will be seen that including all county expenses and taking 
into account late increases, the actual cost of government to the 
average dweller in a Massachusetts city is not far from $40, 
or $200 for the average family, 1 supposed to consist of five 
persons. 



1 By the census of 1905 it was found that the average size of the normal families of the State 
was 4.44, but for convenience in computation 5 is the usual number taken. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 211 

County expenses outside of Suffolk County average about 
$1 per capita. 

Town government in Massachusetts averages to cost less 
than half as much as city government, so that to-day the total 
share of the town dweller in all costs, local, county, State and 
national, is something under $30 per capita, — probably about 
$140 for the average family. 

The total revenues of the United Kingdom in 1908, national 
and local, averaged $32.09 per capita, or $160.45 for the family 
of five. President A. Lawrence Lowell, in " The Government 
of England," 1909, said: — 

It would seem that the burden of local taxation in Boston is not 
very different from that of the average county borough (in England), 
and it is probably less than in the larger English cities, where the rate 
is usually higher than in the smaller towns. 

In France the average of the total revenues, national and 
local, is about $23.27 per capita. 

The following tables show the growth of local taxation and 
of public indebtedness in Massachusetts : — 



212 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Sin 



§ 


© O O O O © O O O iO o o o o o o © o © o o 

©OlOlO©eO<M©^C^CO©©lO-<tl©©©00©Ttl 


CO i— l®OM(NL'5NtO(NaiOI>(MNO)'- llO-"*K35CO 


oo 

en 


©©©©©©©©©10©©©©©©0©©10© 

io©ico5caio-*Ttiooc<iTti©©©-<aH©©cvi»oo5© 




i 


©o©©o©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©© 

t^'SHOt^CQOOO'^O-^OOlC-^CDOC^OOO© 
N01l00500M<Ot^tCCOC500000C<ll>ONlOOtO 


e 
en 


OOOOOOOOOKJOOOOOOOOOOO 
«Ol005t^Tt<©0©©©CO©©lO©Tt(»0-*©GO«0 




e 


OOOOOOOOONOOOOOOOOOOO 
l-HOOTtlOOCOC^OOOCOtMrtfOOOO-^HC^O-^O© 


CO©CO©00COO5t^«O00©00C55O>00OiCC«O»CO5l^ 

rt«H(MHIMHHrtrtNHHrtrtHNHHHi-t 




©©©©©©©©©©©OOO©© © © © © © 
©t^(Mt^CD©lO-*-*00©©lO»O'<*lC<l©©COCO-^l 


t^oomo>oOT-ir^.©©©©oooo©i-~03©t^-'#05t-~ 


s 

1-1 


©00©©©©©©©©©0©©0©©©0© 
©lC0000CO©OTj<Ttl-*-rt<©0<)l0©©lOt^©C0CD 


NO'*'H00(NNOtC0SO00(»00-H00MNT|H0)N 
^ ,_, rtrt ,-H HH ^ ' -l '""' '""' rH ^ 


el 

o 


©©©©©©©©©t^©00©©©0©©©© 
OOlOOOONOOOtONtOOiOOOO^OtOlOINO 


I^-©^t<O>00CO00«OlO^©0C00O500I>-©©-^©CO 


o 
en 


©©o©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©© 


t>-00-"*©00©lOCOlOO500t^0000©t^O51C-*l©5O 




©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©© 
co»-it^T-icg©©'>*ico©co©oo©-<#cC'©i-iooiOTti 


N00^O00OU5(0lO»00C»00(»ONINCl0C000«0 
-IrHrtNHIMHHHHHrtHrtNHNiHHrtH 


© 

8 


©©©©©©©©©©©©©©oo©©©©© 

OINIMNrJiOlOOOOOOOOOTtiCOlOO^O® 


kd^coio©i-icqeo-*©i^iot^io«r>coicicc<i©kO 

,-* rt ,-H t-I ,-1 ,-H ,-H 


00 


C00©©©©0©©0©©©©©©©©©©© 
CO©C^O0©<MC50000©C^©©lO!NI>.©00©!»Tt< 


CO-^lOOOOOOlOOOOOCOt^t^t^-COlOlO^COCOt^ 


©& 


§2 

00 


©©©oo©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©© 

MrHmOCOOOlON(MOMNiOrt!OlOOCOOO'<tl 




O 

H 

« 

o 

H 

6 












^* "2 

Jl § Jiiii | ; f giisi g ill i 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



213 



Public Debt, per Capita. 





United 

States. 1 


Commonwealth of 
Massachusetts. - 


Cities and 
Towns of 

Massa- 
chusetts. 4 




YEAR. 


»"•»■ tin g °ent.3 


Total. 


1880 * . 

1890, 

1900 

1909 


$19.41 
14.22 
14.52 
11.56 


$11.08 

4.38 
4.51 

5.82 


S12.53 
18.62 


S38.42 
31.59 
46.71 
50.97 


$68.91 
50.19 
78.27 
86.97 



1 Less cash in treasury. 

2 Net (less sinking funds and cash). 

3 The contingent debt is a loan of the credit of the Commonwealth to certain metropolitan 
districts for water, sewerage and parks; the interest and sinking fund requirements are annually 
assessed upon said districts; no portion of the debt is a liability of the Commonwealth at large. 

4 Xet indebtedness. 



The growth of tax rate and public debt is matter of alarm to 
many conservative citizens, but it is to be remembered that 
wealth grows, too. 

For a comparative statement of the per capita wealth of the 
inhabitants of Massachusetts, instructive aggregates are se- 
cured by adding together the assessors' valuations of real and 
personal property taxable ; the excess value of corporations, 
which is the market value of the stock, less the value of the real 
estate and machinery taxed locally ; the savings banks and trust 
company deposits taxable, including the Massachusetts Hospital 
Life Insurance Company; the values of life insurance policies 
taxable; and the property of religious, benevolent, literary and 
kindred associations exempted from taxation. This does not 
give a complete inventory of the wealth of the State, for it 
omits such household goods, wearing apparel, etc., as are ex- 
empted from taxation, much other personal property that es- 
capes taxation, and all 'the property owned in common by the 
State, its counties, its cities and its towns. Furthermore, 
changes in methods of taxation have doubtless brought to light 
more or less property previously overlooked ; and also the trans- 
fer of much business from the partnership to the corporate 
form is a factor not to be forgotten. In spite of these chances 
for inaccuracy, the results are probably close enough to the 
facts to serve as a basis for deductions. 



214 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Wealth of Massachusetts per Capita. 



Year. 


Per Capita. 


Year. 


Per Capita. 


1880 

1890 


SI, 115. 17 
1,215.23 


1900 

1909 


$1,353.58 
1,498.25 



Wealth of the United States Per Capita (being the " True Valuation " of 
Real and Personal Property). 



Year. 


Per Capita. 


Year. 


Per Capita. 


1850, 


$307.69 


1890 


$1,038.57 


1860 


513.93 


1895 


1,117.01 


1870 


779.83 


1900 


1,164.79 


1880 


850.20 


1904, 


1,310.11 





Some of the additions made to public expenditures from year 
to year are for things that were previously done individually, 
often at greater cost, and rarely so well. Those for new joint 
undertakings the majority seem to feel that the community 
can afford. Any one who has served in our legislative bodies, 
whether local, State or national, knows that almost never does 
any citizen present specific opportunity for retrenchment, but 
that hundreds and thousands of citizens urge new outlay. There 
are few who would urge the undoing of anything that has been 
done, were that possible. 

Those who criticise the growth of municipal expenditure 
seldom take the trouble to acquaint themselves with its details. 
To meet the charge that the greatest increase had taken place 
in the matter of schools it was computed for the Board of 
Education that in fifty years the average increase in depart- 
ment expenditures in the largest six cities of the State out- 
side of Boston had been: fire protection, 1,711 per cent; 
streets, 2,317 per cent.; police protection, 3,656 per cent.; 
schools, 1,535 per cent. The population had increased 429 
per cent. 1 

It would be well for any critic of civic progress, who deplores 
what he deems public extravagance, to run down the items of 

1 Seventieth annual report of the Board of Education, 1905-06, pp. 288, 289. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 215 

municipal expenditure in the foregoing table and determine 
where he deems retrenchment desirable. Doubtless greater 
economy is achievable in every department of city outlay, and 
not a word is to be said in defence of waste in any branch of the 
government. The more economy, the better ; but, as a matter of 
practical dealing with the problems of government, actual re- 
trenchment — that is, cutting off specific branches of outlay — 
is not likely to take place. On the contrary, the community as 
a whole appears to desire more and more of joint activity, — 
in other words, extension of what may be called the business of 
government. It clearly asks an immediate increase in the outlay 
for education, by the creation of technical schools, — an outlay 
sure to be considerable, and to raise the tax rate. Also, it asks 
material increase of outlay for sanitation, the prevention of 
disease, and the more humane and intelligent care of defectives. 
It asks for more rather than fewer good highways. It wants 
more rather than fewer grade crossings abolished. In many 
other directions it urges joint action for the common good, and, 
as it controls councils and legislatures, there is nothing rash 
in the prediction that it is likely to get what it asks, so that the 
steady rise in the tax rate is likely to continue. 

The methods used for collecting the public revenue do not 
affect the amount of the average contribution directly, but do 
have an important bearing on the relative burdens of individuals. 
The income of the national government is collected by indirect 
taxes. In 1908 the people averaged to pay $3.86 each, or 
$16.30 per family, through the customs revenue; $3.14, or 
$15.70 per family, through the internal revenue; $2.19, 
or $10.95 per family, through the postal service; and $0.72, or 
$3.60 per family, through miscellaneous channels. In the same 
year, of the money collected for State and local purposes in 
Massachusetts, between $4 and $5 per capita was collected 
indirectly, through corporation taxes, license fees, etc. It is 
of more importance that by far the greater part of what we 
call direct taxes, that is, those where property was used as the 
measure of the capacity for sacrifice, were shifted, by the per- 
sons who paid them, upon others' shoulders. Taxes on rented 
property are in large part shifted to the tenants; on mercan- 
tile property, to the customers. 



216 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



The payments of the Boston Elevated Eailway Company to 
the public may serve to illustrate how taxes are indirectly 
paid. 1 In 1909 these payments were: — 



Taxes assessed on real estate, 

Taxes assessed on capital stock and income 

Compensation tax for use of streets, . 

Rental of subway, .... 

Rental of East Boston tunnel, 

Rental of Washington Street tunnel, . 



$310,008 
629,596 
124,171 
186,792 
53,216 
254,924 

$1,558,707 



The gross earnings from operation were $14,493,853, so that 
the part reaching the public treasury was 10.7 per cent. In 
other words, the company acted as a conduit for the transmis- 
sion to the public treasury of a little more than % cent of each 
5-cent fare. Of course with an unalterable fare an increase 
or decrease of taxation means that dividends or operating ex- 
penses or both will be lowered or raised, as the case may be; 
but this does not alter the fact that the money comes from the 
passengers in the first instance, and that, so far as it finally 
accrues to the benefit of the public treasury, it is simply 
indirect taxation. The population of the district served by 
this company is very close to 1,000,000, or say 200,000 families ; 
therefor, each family averaged an indirect contribution of 
about $7.80 to the cost of government, through this channel. 

The steam railroads of Massachusetts in 1909 paid $6,207,- 
497 in taxes, according to the report of the Railroad Commis- 
sioners. The percentage of this corresponding to the percentage 
of their total operated trackage within the State was $2,979,598 ; 
and so it is probable that each Massachusetts family averaged 
to pay taxes, through freights and fares collected by railroads, 
to the amount of about $4.50. Much less is paid through the 
medium of the steam roads than of the street railways, because 
the steam roads have to pay no compensation taxes and no 
rentals of tunnels and subways. Furthermore, the right of 
way of steam roads, five rods wide, and all the structures 
thereon, are exempted from local taxation. The tax in re- 



Report of the Directors of the Boston Elevated Railway Company, 1909. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 217 

spect to this and their rolling stock shows up, if at all, in 
the franchise tax, which is assessed only in respect of stock. So 
much of steam road property as is represented "by bonds held 
outside the State pays no tax at all, and no tax is in actual 
result paid in respect to much of the property represented by 
bonds held within the State. 

Neither in the case of the steam roads nor in that of the 
street roads does the tax nominally paid by the corporation 
disclose the full proportion of fares and freights that ulti- 
mately gets into the public treasury. A fraction of the pay- 
ments, made first to operatives and for supplies, in the end 
goes toward the cost of government, for operatives and mer- 
chants must in their turn pay taxes. 

These conditions repeat themselves in varying degree in 
the case of all excises, whether they take the form of other 
corporation taxes, of license fees for the sale of liquor, of 
customs duties or of internal revenue taxes. For the greater 
part the burden is in the end borne by the consumer. The same 
thing is true of direct property taxes paid by landlords, pro- 
ducers and middlemen, these for the most part being shifted to 
the ultimate consumer. 

It is probable that if precise computation were possible, 
it would show that about 10 per cent, of all the expenditure 
of a Massachusetts citizen sooner or later finds its way into the 
public treasury. Nobody can escape this, whether rich or poor, 
high or low; and the serious phase of it is, that the percentage 
of contribution must on the whole be at least as large for the 
poor as for the rich. If that be true, then the actual sacrifice 
in the cost of government falls most heavily on the shoulders 
least able to bear it. 

The result of this system of raising the public revenue is that 
the steady increase in 'the tax rate really means more to the 
Avage earners than to any other class in the community. It 
swells the cost of living most to those who, after making the 
payment, have the least left. This makes the increase of the 
cost of government of even greater importance than the figures 
on their face would indicate. 



218 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

C. CRIME, PAUPERISM AND INSANITY. 

The economic waste growing out of human deterioration, 
physical, mental and moral, is a matter of prime importance, 
and one that calls imperiously for the application of every 
practical remedial agency in this Commonwealth. 

Every normal community has its percentage of abnormal 
units which fall below the social standard or average, and as 
this percentage increases or decreases, so does the efficiency of 
the community decrease or increase. 

Crime, pauperism and insanity are the incidents of all com- 
munities ; they are the stigmata and evidences of physical and 
mental deterioration; and they are contributory elements in 
the general volume of economic inefficiency and waste. Crimi- 
nals, paupers and the mentally defective — insane, epileptics 
and idiots — are not only nonproductive and industrially sterile, 
but they are economic burdens, since they must be housed, 
clothed, fed and cared for by the economically fit, in the interests 
of humanity, and must be restrained and guarded, in the inter- 
ests of public safety and order. 

Every factor that increases the economic burdens of the com- 
munity must necessarily increase the cost of productive indus- 
try; and as the price of all commodities is primarily regulated 
by the cost of production, the consumer finds the cost of all 
forms of inefficiency and waste entering into the prices he pays 
for the necessaries of life. It becomes, therefore, a question of 
first importance, in considering the causes that have made and 
are making for the high cost of living, to examine into these 
three perennial phases of inefficiency, with a view of estimating 
their volume and influence and of finding remedies to minimize 
them. 

The best thought of the age has reached the conclusion that 
the causes of these three phases of physical degeneration and 
economic inefficiency — crime, pauperism and insanity — are 
pathological, and that their cure, their elimination from the field 
of human waste, must be sought in remedial rather than in penal 
methods. 

The criminal is the degenerate enemy of society, whose 
offences against law and order and the person and property of 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 219 

his neighbor render him dangerous to the community. Society 
in self-defence seizes and segregates him ; but segregation is not 
cure. Until his segregation and restraint are supplemented by 
remedies designed to cure his diseased body and mind, he must 
continue to return from captivity to freedom, to be banned from 
society, suspected and harried by the police, refused companion- 
ship and fellowship by labor, his return to efficiency rendered 
impossible ; with the result that he reverts to his war on the 
community. The world in former days treated the criminal 
like a wild beast, and hunted him ; as civilization advanced and 
knowledge increased, penal codes were revised and softened; 
and later, while the severity and brutality of penal methods 
were reformed and an effort was made to inculcate habits of 
industry in the social Ishmaelite, penology never seemed to 
grasp the idea that the normalization of the criminal was essen- 
tial to the safety and sanity of the community, and that it was 
more likely to secure this result through clinical and educational 
procedure than by penal treatment alone. 

The number of persons committed to the various penal institu- 
tions of the Commonwealth in the past year was 32,228; and 
of this number, after excluding 1,242 persons under sixteen 
and more than sixty years of age, and outside of the productive 
period, we have 30,986 persons eliminated from productive 
work by crime, and added to the burdens of the community. 
When we add to these the army of paupers, vagrants and insane, 
we have about 126,631 persons whose inefficiency burdens the 
productive energies of the State. 

The tables of statistics that accompany this report relate only 
to this Commonwealth. The statistics of the other States and 
Territories of the Union would show a similar condition. It 
will readily be seen how enormous this total volume of ineffi- 
ciency and waste is, how important its bearing is upon the well- 
being of the efficient and industrious, and how essential it 
becomes to seek means of reducing the evil. 

Drunkenness is one of the most common accompanying cir- 
cumstances of pauperism and unemployment. There were 
147,019 arrests for this offence during the year, and about 
21,994 committed to penal institutions as a consequence of the 
number of offences of this nature, or of inability to pay the fines 



220 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

levied by the court. One of the tables annexed analyses these 
commitments. We find that 1,286 persons were committed 
four times, 980 five times, 3,925 from six to fifteen times, 
1,042 from sixteen to thirty times, 176 from thirty to fifty 
times and 44 more than fifty times, for drunkenness. These 
impressive figures are an indictment of the inadequacy and 
stupidity of the system in vogue in this Commonwealth for 
treating an evil that medical science, knowledge and experience 
have insistently pronounced to be a disease. The drunkard is 
treated as a delinquent, instead of a defective. He is the sub- 
ject of more hysteria and legislative futility than any other 
person in the community ; he is punished by fines and imprison- 
ment, when the good of the community demands that he be 
treated as any other diseased being should be treated; his pun- 
ishment too frequently falls on his family, the members of which 
are impoverished and pauperized by his fines or cessation from 
labor. 

There is an urgent demand for clinical, not penal, treatment 
of alcoholism. The gravity of the question calls for special 
investigation; the subject has become a political football and 
a theme for unscientific agitation, and it is time for a calm 
inquiry into its causes, in order that its cure may be found. 
The question is intimately associated with those other questions, 
wages and prices, upon which depends the physical nourish- 
ment of the worker. The scale of wages in the textile industries 
is not high. Any interference with the normal progress of these 
industries causes unemployment for longer or shorter periods, 
and, as the margin which even the keenest thrift provides 
between earnings and expenditures is very small, the days of 
unemployment mean expenditure of savings, and hardships. 
Insufficient food supply, lack of nutrition and depleted physical 
condition then call for stimulation which produces drunkenness. 
Investigation would furnish the knowledge necessary to provide 
antidotes for the evil. 

Again, as another table shows, of the 32,228 persons com- 
mitted during the year for all offences, 28,561 are literate and 
only 3,657 are illiterate. These figures seem to indicate that 
illiteracy is not a cause of crime, though it may be an ally of 
lawlessness through lack of knowledge. Literacy, on the other 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 221 

hand, is not a preventive of crime, especially the literacy we 
impart to our children in our schools under the illusory name 
of education. The education that does not train hand and brain 
to economic efficiency and industrial usefulness, but imparts 
literacy enough to sharpen criminal instincts and sterilize indus- 
trial tastes, is a handicap to the Commonwealth, not a benefit. 
Educational reform in the interest of practical utility merits 
serious attention. 

The elimination of an army of 126,631 persons from the 
economic life of a community is a serious handicap to industry ; 
and it must be remembered that almost as many more are 
existent who are unrecorded and untabulated in the official 
statistics of the State. If we assume this army of inefficiency 
to number 150,000, and estimate the annual loss for each of 
this number to be $525, — a fair estimate of average individual 
earnings, — the total yearly loss from this source alone would 
amount to $78,750,000. When to this we add the sum of 
$19,000,000 spent in the State on delinquents, dependents and 
defectives, we have an annual loss of $97,750,000 that must be 
credited to crime, pauperism and insanity, or about $30 per 
capita for the population of the Commonwealth. 

That a large amount of the $19,000,000 annually expended 
on crime, pauperism, insanity and their collateral incidents is 
wasted is beyond question; if a quarter of the sum were ex- 
pended in a serious attempt to reduce these evils by sane and 
scientific methods, much of this inefficiency would be removed. 
Yet as a matter of fact the percentage of this social waste 
appears to be constantly increasing with the passage of time and 
the growth of population. It is an enormous burden on the 
productive energies of the State, and an item of importance in 
producing the high cost of living. 

Attention should be directed to the method of compiling 
statistics in the various State, county, city and town adminis- 
trative departments. They exhibit industry and elaboration 
enough ; undoubtedly the facts that are needful to an intelligent 
understanding and use of the information are in the tables; 
but they lack lucidity and co-ordination in compilation, and 
appear to be an arithmetical chaos. They need simplification 
ynd co-ordination; they should supplement and explain each 



222 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

other, and should lead to some clear and logical conclusions. 
Statistics lose much of their value when they lack clarity and 
simplicity, when they present a problem for the statistician 
rather than a fund of information and knowledge for the 
layman. x 

D. ACCIDENT AND DISEASE. 

One of the large factors making for the lessening of produc- 
tion and the disturbance of the law of supply and demand is 
the matter of unnecessary accidents, sickness and deaths. It is 
only recently in this country that these questions have come to 
be considered as important. The old theory that accident, sick- 
ness and death are visitations from the Almighty, which are to 
be borne unresistingly, is still, unfortunately, altogether too 
prevalent. Other nations, especially Germany, have led the 
United States in working out and solving these health and 
accident problems. In the question of industrial accidents 
alone, a special committee of the National Association of Manu- 
facturers, in a report made this year, estimates that there are 
500,000 workers annually incapacitated or killed in the United 
States, half of whom might be saved by such preventive measures 
as are in general use in the industries in Germany; and that 
the unnecessary loss to the nation from such accidents is not less 
than $125,000,000 annually. Figures from the Interstate 
Commerce Commission report show that in 1907-08, 11,800 
persons, employees and others were killed, and 111,000 maimed, 
on American railroads. The number of accidents and deaths in 
industry and otherwise is not ascertainable, but is tremendous. 
The loss in life and limb in manufacturing is very large, but at 
present there is no way of determining exactly how large it is. 
Inasmuch as Massachusetts is distinctly a manufacturing State, 
this subject is of great importance in this Commonwealth. The 
crippling or killing of the workingman, as an incident of manu- 
facturing, should be as much a charge on the manufactured 
product as taxes, insurance, etc. 

Under our present system, it is estimated that one-third to 
one-half of the time of the State and federal courts is devoted 

1 For statistical tables accompanying the text of this chapter, see Appendix H. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 223 

to the trial of accident damage suits, and that less than 30 per 
cent, of the premiums paid by employers to liability insurance 
companies reaches the injured, or the widows, children or 
dependents of the killed. 1 Accident prevention is of greater 
importance than compensation. It is the duty of the State to 
follow the example of other nations which have successfully put 
into operation such laws protecting the lives and limbs of its 
workers, but it should do more than this. Money cannot replace 
the crushed hand or the severed foot ; it cannot compensate for 
the years of pain and misery undergone by the victim of indus- 
trial progress, or heal the heart wounds of the widowed and 
fatherless ; but it can and should remedy one of the great wrongs 
of industrial workers, by taking the commercial loss of indus- 
trial accidents from the shoulders of the unfortunate victims, 
to distribute it equitably upon society. 

The lack of a workingman's compensation act has worked 
great injustice to the workingman, who has been maimed through 
the desire to increase manufactured product without safe- 
guarding the life and limb of the worker. The correct principle, 
demonstrated by the experience of those countries which have 
put such laws into effect, is that such legislation must be based 
on mutuality, where practically all, employers and employees, 
contribute to the indemnity fund. 

While the German method has been a great success, the 
adoption of any European system in its entirety is not feasible 
in this country or in its separate States, although it is certain 
that a modification, suitable to our conditions, would result in 
a great saving of life, would do away with the hardships that 
now result from industrial accidents, and would retain the army 
of disabled workers on the productive side of industry. 

The commission is of the opinion that the present laws gov- 
erning employer's liability in this State are inadequate and 
inequitable. One of the needs of the time is consideration of 
this question, with the purpose of establishing the facts, to 
show employer and employed that in this matter their interests 
are identical, and to devise and recommend to the Legislature 
measures designed to stop this great waste, which will be based 

1 From the preliminary report of the Commission on Industrial Indemnity Insurance, Na- 
tional Association of Manufacturers, 1910. 



224 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

on correct constitutional and economic principles. The question 
of workingmen's compensation is a pressing problem of the day. 

An examination of the causes that make for diminution of 
production and consequent increase of prices shows that one of 
the real causes only just beginning to be measured at its true 
value is the annual drain by sickness and death. This drain, 
which changes many thousands of our people from producers 
into charges either on their families or the city or State, 
might be greatly reduced by the application of sound methods 
of modern preventive medicine. Human labor, capitalized, has 
been estimated to be worth five times all other capital. The 
declaration of Pasteur, made years ago, that no human being 
need die of a parasitic disease, has been accepted as a scientific 
fact by the medical profession; yet there are living to-day in 
the United States 9,000,000 people who will, unless preventive 
measures are speedily applied, die of tuberculosis, — a preven- 
table disease; and 300,000 persons, now living in Massachusetts, 
are doomed to death from this cause. 1 

Conservation of natural resources, such as minerals, forests, 
water power, and of the efficiency of the social organization, 
is now accepted as the national policy; but the conservation of 
the physical, mental and moral efficiency of the individual is 
not yet receiving the consideration that its importance war- 
rants. 

At the lowest estimate, 600,000 die in the United States every 
year of diseases that could be prevented by public action. Up- 
wards of 4,000,000 people in the United States are suffering 
from sickness, one-half of which is unnecessary. The resulting 
waste, not including the misery and death cost, is moderately 
estimated at $3,000,000,000 each year. It is estimated that 
there are 50,000 persons in Massachusetts afflicted with tuber- 
culosis, and that the average of the life of each will be cut short 
by twenty years. It is estimated that there are about 4 per 
cent, of the population of Massachusetts on the sick list all the 
time, which is equivalent to 13 days per capita a year. 2 

The greatest asset of the State is its men and women. 
Private associations, organized to prevent infant mortality by 

1 Deaths from all forms of tuberculosis will approximate 10 per cent. 

2 Prof. Irving Fisher's "Report on National Vitality." 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 225 

educating parents to their duty and informing the public at 
large concerning the importance of this question of health, are 
doing splendid work. The public has not, however, been awak- 
ened as jet to a full appreciation of the money cost of prevent- 
able disease, and its effect in taking wage earners out of 
productive employment, diminishing supply, and thus helping to 
increase the cost of living, while at the same time putting the 
sick as burdens either upon the family or upon the public purse. 
Prof. Irving Fisher of Yale University, of the Committee 
of One Hundred on National Health, delegated one of his as- 
sistants to estimate for the commission the loss in life and money 
in Massachusetts, through the neglect of the State and of local 
communities to take the proper preventive action. The report on 
this subject, printed in Appendix C, shows the estimated loss to 
the State of Massachusetts because of preventable death and 
serious illness in 1908 to have been as follows: — 

21,906 postponable deaths, costing $1,700 each, . . $37,240,200.00 
25,S93 persons seriously ill during the year, 50 per 
cent, of whose illness could have been prevented, 
earning $525 each during the year when well, . . 6,796,912.50 

$16,200,000, cost of illness, 50 per cent, of which is 
preventable, 8,100,000.00 



Total, $52,137,112.50 

Generally speaking, the enforcement of the health laws of 
Massachusetts by local boards of health is notoriously inefficient 
and unsatisfactory. It is the weakest point in the government 
of many cities and towns. The administration of all health work 
in the State should be concentrated under one head, and simi- 
larly in the cities and towns, with general authority and ample 
appropriation for the State Board of Health to enforce all health 
laws and to institute or adopt methods to prevent disease. The 
commission notes with approval a bill passed by the present 
Legislature, and recently signed by Governor Draper, creating 
a commission of two members each from the State Board of 
Health, State Board of Charities, Commission on Hospitals for 
Consumptives, and the chairman of the State Board of Health, 
whose duty it shall be to examine into the question of the enforce- 



226 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

merit of the health laws, to suggest such changes as will do away 
with duplication of effort, and increase the efficiency of adminis- 
tration, both State and local. If this work is done properly, 
the result will be of inestimable value to the State. Its beneficial 
effects will appear not only in better health and increased length 
of life for the people of the State, but in a decrease of the present 
economic loss through charges on family incomes and on taxes, 
decrease of production and disturbance of the law of supply 
and demand, due to unnecessary disease and death. 

The social diseases, syphilis, gonorrhea, etc., are responsible 
to a degree only recently becoming partly understood for the 
existence of a large proportion of the defectives who fill our 
institutions. These social diseases, which certainly are prevent- 
able, are one of the gravest of the menaces to national efficiency. 
Dr. Morrow declares that the extermination of social diseases, 
all of which are preventable, would probably mean the elimina- 
tion of at least one-half of our institutions for defectives. The 
trouble hitherto has been that this subject has been regarded as 
indelicate; even the doctors discussed it behind closed doors. 
But, with a growing comprehension of what the evil conse- 
quences have been in loss of happiness, life and money, the 
subject is now being treated in the open; the charity worker, 
the district nurse and the poor authorities are meeting in con- 
vention and comparing notes, and the penalty for a false 
modesty is found to be too great to allow former methods to 
continue. In the last analysis it is the State that pays the bill ; 
and it is the State, through its Legislature, which should take 
measures to find out as nearly as possible the damage that is 
being done by social diseases. 

E. WASTE FROM FIRE. 

The United States stands first among the countries of the 
world in the amount of property annually destroyed by fire. 
The table of annual property losses in the United States by fires, 
1878-1909, follows 1 : — 

1 The "Insurance Year Book." 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



227 



Year 



Property Loss. Insurance Loss. 



1878 
1879 
1880 
1881 
1882 
1883 
1884 
1885 
1886 
1887, 
1888 
1889 
1890 
1891 
1892 
1893 
1894 
1895 
1896 
1897 
1898 
1899 
1900 
1901 
1902 
1903 
1904 
1905 
1906 
1907, 
1908 
1909 



Totals, thirty-three year3, 



$64,315,900 
77,703,700 
74,643,400 
81,280,900 
84,505,024 
100,149,228 
110,008,611 
102,818,796 
104,924,750 
120,283,055 
110,885,665 
123,046,833 
108,993,792 
143,764,967 
151,516,098 
167,544,370 
140,006,484 
142,110,233 
118,737,420 
116,354,570 
130,593,905 
153,597,830 
160,929,805 
174,160,680 
161,488,355 
145,302,155 
230,520,131 
165,221,650 
444,326,124 
215,671,250 
217,885,850 
196,250,000! 



$4,772,437,820 



$36,575,900 

44,464,700 

42,525,000 

44,641,900 

48,875,131 

54,808,664 

60,679,818 

57,430,789 

60,506,567 

69,659,508 

63,965,724 

73,679,465 

65,015,465 

90,576,918 

93,511,936 

105,994,577 

89,574,699 

84,689,030 

73,903,800 

66,722,140 

73,796,080 

92,683,715 

95,403,650 

106,680,590 

94,775,045 

87,900,000 

138,314,212 

109,236,420 

276,732,270 

114,646,335 

116,426,231 

lOS.OOO.OOO 1 



$2,813,371,596 



The average annual national loss by fire for the last five years 
has been $218,000,000. Approximately 3,000 persons lose their 
lives by fire in the United States each year. 2 

The fire loss in Massachusetts in 1908 was $21,638,866, of 



Estimated. 



2 President's address, National Fire Protection Association, 1909. 



228 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



which $13,148,382 was due to the Chelsea fire; in 1909, 
$8,504,474.96. 1 

Statistics gathered by the United States Department of Com- 
merce and Labor show an average loss in six European countries 
of 33 cents per capita, and an average in European cities of 8 
fires each year for each 10,000 of population. In the United 
States the annual average loss for the last ten years has been 
about $2.58 per capita; in Massachusetts for the last six years, 
including the Chelsea fire, $3.11 per capita; and in Boston, 
$3.87 per capita. The average annual number of fires in the 
United States is 40 for each 10,000 of population. In other 
words, the fire loss is from eight to ten times as great here as 
in Europe, while we have an average of five times as many 
fires. 

The average annual fire loss of Massachusetts for the last six 
years has been $9,641,849. 

Boston has had an annual average fire loss for the last six 
years of $2,221,318. 

Glasgow, with 140,823 more population than Boston, had in 
1908 a fire loss of $325,000. 

The property waste by fire in Boston and Massachusetts, 
from 1904 to 1909, is shown in the State Eire Marshal's report 
to be as follows : — 



Loss. 


Boston. 


The State. 


Loss. 


Boston. 


The State. 


1904. 






1907. 






Property loss, 


$2,311,121.00 


$6,451,093.00 


Property loss, 


$2,097,066.00 


$7,962,775.00 


Insurance loss, 


2,099,761.00 


5,238,209.00 


Insurance loss, 


1,957,903.00 


6,630,326.00 


1905. 






1908. 






Property loss, 


2,131,236.00 


7,212,714.00 


Property loss, 


3,209,646.57 


21,638,866.76 


Insurance loss, 


1,939,928.00 


5,762,811.00 


Insurance loss, 


2,877,864.29 


16,341,836.32 


1906. 






1909. 






Property loss, 


1,331,824.00 


6,081,176.00 


Property loss, 


2,247,019.72 


8,504,474.96 


Insurance loss, 


1,271,329.00 


5,195,978.00 


Insurance loss, 


1,721,416.19 


6,755,684.43 



This fire waste, which is so disproportionately large in this 
country, is an absolute destruction of property. The belief is 
r.-ot uncommon that the insurance companies pay the loss, if 



1 State Fire Marshal's report, District Police. 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



229 



happily the loser is fully insured. This is a false idea. The 
insurance company is nothing but a banking institution, re- 
ceiving money from many and distributing it among a few. The 
loss from every fire comes back to the people, and they pay every 
cent of it in rent and taxes, in the food they buy and the clothes 
they wear. In addition to the huge and unnecessary waste by 
lire in this country, there is another phase of the cost to the 
people shown in the expense of maintaining fire departments in 
all cities and towns ; the cost of enforcing building laws ; of main- 
taining fire marshal departments; the expense of insurance 
companies, with their adjuncts of inspection bureaus, rating 
organizations, etc. ; and part of the expense of water works 
systems. All these items are charged back to the public. 

The excessive cost in this country, as compared to Europe, 
of keeping up fire departments, is shown in the following 
table : — 



City. 


Population. 


Fire Department Maintenance. 


Per Capita. 


Cologne and suburbs, . 


458,037 


509,609 marks = $121,286.00 


SO. 26 


Berlin 


1,888,848 


2,035,346 marks = 484,412.00 


.26 


London, 


6,580,616 


£254,045 =1,238,469.00 


.19 


Paris, 


2,714,068 


2,925,334 francs = 564,589.00 


.21 


Stockholm, 


311,043 


269,164 kroner = 72,135.00 


.23 


Budapest 


723,322 


281,544 kronen = 57,123.00 


.08 


Milan, 


491,460 


431,253 lire = 83,321.00 


.17 


Boston, 


595,083 ! 


1,498,428.17 


2.51 



1 Census of 1905. 



Cities of Austria-Hungary, Belgium, France, Germany, Nor- 
way, Russia, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, with a 
reported population of 19,913,816, had a fire loss of but 
$9,582,340, — a per capita loss of 48 cents. If the United 
States had Europe's per capita fire loss of 48 cents, the total 
waste from fire in this country in 1907 would have been $41,- 
055,725, — a saving of natural resources in one year of $174,- 
615,525. A writer in the " Engineering News " estimates that 
the annual loss of 165,000 buildings destroyed or damaged by 
fire in this country each year, if allowed a frontage of only 65 
feet each, would line both sides of a street reaching from Boston 



230 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

to Chicago, and that such a street is burning up at the rate of 
three miles a day. 

Another great charge on the people in fire loss is the cost of 
maintaining the insurance companies. Of the total premiums 
paid in in 1909, only a little more than half were paid for 
losses during the year, or, to be exact, 53 per cent. If the 
total income of insurance companies is considered, the return 
to policy holders is less than one half of their income. 

In March, 1903, the Insurance Committee of the Boston Mer- 
chants' Association called the attention of the association to 
what was characterized as an " unfair " increase of the insur- 
ance rates in the business district of Boston, and presented fig- 
ures to substantiate their claim. From these figures it appeared 
that in the ten years prior to this report the premium income 
of the various companies doing business in Boston on Boston 
risks was $35,000,000, and that during this time there had been 
paid in fire losses on Boston risks $16,471,426, leaving $18,- 
000,000 to the companies to be applied to expenses, surplus and 
dividends. The report for the whole number of fire insurance 
companies doing business in 1909, referred to previously, shows 
that losses take about half of the receipts. 

Fire insurance is an absolute necessity to the community. 
The credit of the ordinary business house is in a way predi- 
cated on the fact that it carries in insurance nearly or quite the 
value of its goods. Insurance is a fixed and heavy charge on 
business. No wage earner would dare to invest his savings 
in a home unless he were able to protect himself by insurance. 
It may be that the companies do not receive excessive profits, 
and that the great bulk of the difference between income and 
losses is paid to agents in commissions. But in a public ne- 
cessity like fire insurance, which everybody must have, and in 
which there is no competition of prices, the glaring dispro- 
portion between what the public pays and what it receives in 
return is unnecessary and burdensome. 

A table showing the condition and transactions of companies 
doing business in the United States for the year ending January 
1, 1909, follows: — 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



231 



Number of companies : — 

Stock, 

Mutual, 

Capital, 

Assets, exclusive of premium notes, 

Net surplus, 

Cash premiums received during year, 

Total cash income during year, 

Paid for losses during year, . 

Paid for dividends during year, . 

Total disbursement during year, . 

Risks written during year, . 

Expenses other than losses and dividends during 



year, 



*324 

272 

$84,704,959 

611,896,763 

212,342,367 

312,906,129 

339,077,557 

167,240,146 

28,612,870 

307,377,705 

2 32,000,000,000 

111,524,689 



As in the other items of waste treated in this report, the total 
is found to be stupendous. Such a loss as that suffered from 
fires, which are estimated to be destroying property at the rate 
of $3,000 an hour, is certain to have its effect in the increased 
cost of commodities, and demands a remedy. The cause is 
wooden buildings, poor construction and national carelessness. 
In Germany, a person who has a fire on his premises is ar- 
rested, and the burden of proof that he was not guilty of 
carelessness is placed upon him. The penalty is fine or im- 
prisonment. In France, an owner of a building is responsible 
for loss starting on his premises, if it damages that of his 
neighbor. 3 

The American public would not be likely to tolerate such 
laws, but they explain why the loss in Europe is so much less 
than it is here. 

The remedy is largely with the people themselves. Laws 
regulating the character and construction of buildings should 
be enforced strictly. Education on the subject of fire preven- 
tion, the causes of fires and the need of greater care should be 
more general. The elimination of fire-traps in the crowded 
quarters of large communities should be insisted upon. Fire 
departments should be taken out of politics, and adequate water 



1 Including 38 Lloyds. 

2 Approximation. These statistics of fire insurance in the United States are, with the excep- 
tion of the estimate of risks written during year, compiled from the "Insurance Year Book," 
published by the "Spectator" Company. They do not include the returns of a few stock com- 
panies, and some 500 mutual and town and county mutuals whose transactions are purely local 
and individually of small volume. 

3 Gorham Dana, manager, Underwriters' Bureau of New England. 



232 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

supplies should be provided. Ordinances and regulations re- 
garding the storage and use of gasolene, explosives and matches, 
and the care of refuse waste, oil and similar materials, should 
be passed, where not now in force. 

F. UNEMPLOYMENT. 

In any consideration of unemployment a careful distinction 
must be made of the different classes of unemployed. In gen- 
eral, it is possible to distinguish five classes. (1) There are 
those who are out of work because they are physically, mentally 
or morally defective, and consequently unfit for employment. 
This class might be termed the " unemployable, " as distin- 
guished from classes of the unemployed proper. (2) There 
are those who are out of work at certain times of the year, be- 
cause they are engaged in so-called seasonal occupations. In 
such occupations the employment is, in the nature of things, 
periodic. The building trades furnish an example. (3) There 
are those who are out of work because of a faulty adjustment 
of the supply of labor to the demand throughout the State or 
the nation. There may be a scarcity of labor in one locality, 
and an oversupply in another; an active demand for labor in 
one place, and a stagnation of industry in another. A certain 
proportion of unemployment is accounted for always by the fact 
that some labor is in the wrong place, — the place where it is 
not wanted by employers. (4) There are those who are out 
of work by reason of the overcrowded condition of the labor 
market in the occupation in which they are engaged. This con- 
dition is found most frequently in the unskilled trades. (5) 
Finally, there may be a certain amount of unemployment due 
to a general excess of the labor supply in proportion to the 
demand. This excess may be either temporary and acute, due 
to industrial depression, or permanent and chronic. So far as 
the latter condition develops in any country, it constitutes the 
most serious aspect of unemployment. In the American States, 
however, it may be affirmed with confidence that no such gen- 
eral excess of the labor supply over the labor .demand has yet 
developed, or is likely to appear in the future. 

At the present time there is very little unemployment in 



1910. 



HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 



233 



Massachusetts ; the waste through idle labor is slight. The' 
panic of 1907 was followed by a great increase of unemploy- 
ment. The stagnation in the labor market continued during 
the first quarter of 1908. when conditions began to improve. 
In 1909 the demand for labor became active, and most of the 
unemployed again found places in the ranks of the workers. 
This movement is shown by the following table, from the last 
quarterly report of the Bureau of Statistics on the state of em- 
ployment in the organized industries : — 

Number and Membership of Labor Organizations reporting and Number 
of Members a?id Percentage of Membership Idle at end of Quarters 
specified. 











Number Reporting. 


Idle at End of Quarter. 


QUARTER ENDING — 


Unions. 


Members. 


Members. 


Percentages. 


March 31, 1908, . 
June 30, 1908, . 
September 30, 1908, 
December 31, 1908, 
March 31, 1909, . 
June 30, 1909, . 
September 30, 1909, 
December 31, 1909, 








256 
493 
651 
770 

777 
780 
797 
830 


66,968 
72,815 
83,969 
102,941 
105,059 
105,944 
113,464 
107,689 


11,987 

10,490 

8,918 

14,345 

11,997 

6,736 

5,451 

10,084 


17.90 
14.41 
10.62 
13.94 
11.42 
6.36 
4.80 
9.36 



It appears that December 31, 1909, 9.36 per cent, of the 
members of the unions making reports were idle. This per- 
centage was higher than that of September 30, 1909, by reason 
of unfavorable weather conditions at the close of the year. It 
was, however, lower by 4 points than the percentage Decem- 
ber 31, 1908. The average percentage of unemployment for 
1909 was 7.98, as contrasted with 11.22 for 1908. 

The records of the Boston Free Employment Office show that 
in March, 1908, there was a daily average of 4 applicants for 
every job; in March. 1909, 2 applicants for every job; and in 
March, 1910, only 1.5. The superintendent of the office states 
that at present there is a scarcity of labor in skilled trades 
and farm work. Competent machinists at $2.25 to $3 per day 
are in great demand. In the building trades the demand for 
labor is very active. There is a notable scarcity of competent 



234 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

farm laborers, with a prospect that farmers will have to pay 
more for labor than in previous years. 

The superintendent of the Springfield Eree Employment 
Office declares that he finds it almost impossible to fill even 25 
per cent, of the applications for domestic service. It may be 
remarked in passing that this scarcity of domestic labor, by 
forcing families of moderate means to dispense with servants, 
means greater economy not only through the saving of the 
employee's wages, but through reduction of domestic waste. 
It is a well-known fact that waste in the household is greatly 
increased through the carelessness and irresponsibility of both 
servant and mistress. The high cost of- domestic help is an 
element in the increased cost of living for families that still 
keep servants. The double gain through dispensing with ser- 
vants lowers the cost to families who take this course. 

In applying remedies for unemployment, Massachusetts has 
already made a promising beginning through the establishment 
of the free employment office and provision for industrial edu- 
cation. The former helps to bring the supply of labor and the 
demand into contact with each other, and to reduce temporary 
unemployment due to lack of a medium of communication be- 
tween employers who need workers and workers who want em- 
ployment. It is advisable, as the commission elsewhere suggests, 
to take measures for extending the facilities of the free em- 
ployment service to relieve the scarcity of farm labor. 

The promotion of industrial education reduces the number 
of the residual class of unskilled labor in which unemployment 
is most prevalent. The records of the free employment offices 
show the fundamental importance of industrial education in 
dealing with this problem of the unemployed. The report on 
" Unemployment in Massachusetts," made by the Bureau of 
Statistics of Labor in 1907, states : — 

Hundreds of the applicants, when asked what sort of position they 
desired, answered, " Oh, any kind of work." A careful inquiry elicited 
the information that they were not prepared to do anything except 
ordinary labor. They had not learned trades, and had never remained 
long enough in any branch of business to become proficient therein. 
Sixty-five boys between fourteen and sixteen years of age and 770 
young persons from sixteen to twenty years of age applied for work, 
yet none of these 835 applicants were qualified to undertake any branch 






1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 235 

of work that could be called skilled in any degree. The majority of 
them had left the grammar school at ages varying from thirteen and 
a half to fourteen and a half years, their parents in nearly all cases 
being too poor, probably, to give them a higher form of education. 

These children and young persons accept positions requiring no skill, 
and they remain there. They begin work as office boys, messengers, 
porters, and in branches of labor akin thereto. Unless they are am- 
bitious, and attend evening school, their industrial position in life is 
fixed upon a low level. That this is so is proved by the fact that 
hundreds of applicants from thirty to forty years of age confess that 
they do not know how to do any particular thing in the line of skilled 
labor. Nothing that has come within the cognizance of this Bureau 
so clearly demonstrates the absolute need of industrial education as 
an examination of the qualifications of the applicants for positions at 
the State Free Employment Office. 

We urge the extension of the provisions for indnstrial edu- 
cation in this State as a measure for reducing to a minimum 
the waste through unemployment by affording adequate oppor- 
tunity to boys and girls to fit themselves for remunerative, self- 
supporting employment. 

G. EDUCATION. 

In considering the high cost of living, it is not beside the 
question to ask if the system of public school education in the 
Commonwealth, now in process of reconstruction, bears any 
relation to this problem. 

During the last five years Massachusetts has been aroused to 
a realization of the inefficiency of its present educational meth- 
ods. The reorganization of the State Board of Education in 
Massachusetts, following the work of the Commission on In- 
dustrial Education, indicates that, in this State at least, we are 
on the road to remedy what evils may have grown out of the 
old forms of education. Ever since the beginning of the public 
school system in Massachusetts the school child has been headed 
for the arts and professions, in spite of the fact that only half 
of the pupils graduating from the elementary grades enter the 
high schools, and approximately only 5 per cent, finally enter 
college. 

The per capita cost of public school education has been ad- 
vancing greatly, as is shown by the following table : — 



236 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Some Comparative Public School Statistics, 1879-1909. 1 

1879. Expenditure for each child between 5 and 15, . . $13.71 
1909. Expenditure for each child between 5 and 15, . . 26.73 



1879. Total expenditure for public schools, . 
1909. Total expenditure for public schools, . 

1879. Per capita valuation in Massachusetts, 
1909. Per capita valuation in Massachusetts, 
Increase, 28.5 per cent. 

1879. Per capita expenditure for schools, . 
1909. Per capita expenditure for schools, . 
Increase, 113.2 per cent. 

1879. Population of State (census of 1875), 

1909. Population of State (census of 1905), 

Increase, 81.8 per cent. 



1879. Number of high school pupils, 

1909. Number of high school pupils, 

Increase, 179.4 per cent. 

In 1879 the high school pupils averaged 1 to every 
15 families of three or more persons. 

In 1909 the average was 1 to every 9 families of three 
or more persons. 



$4,994,824.41 
19,377,886.44 

. $930.00 
. 1,195.42 



$3.02 
6.44 



1,651,912 
3,003,680 



19,311 
53,958 



The teachers personally have not benefited, for their remu- 
neration is practically unchanged ; the money has been spent in 
the extension of a system which is not adapted to modern needs, 
"but, on the contrary, is contributing to the causes making for 
the advance of commodity prices. As a result, manual labor, 
has become a reproach. Children are ashamed of the honest 
occupations of their fathers, and their education leads them to 
the counting room and office, and away from the farm, factory 
and workshop. The testimony before the commission in regard 
to the shoe trade was to the effect that graduates from the high 
and grammar schools refuse to become artisans, and seek em- 
ployment as clerks, bookkeepers and the like, where the remu- 
neration will be less from the start and the chances of advance- 



1 Furnished by Geo. H. Martin, secretary, State Board of Education. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 237 

ment may be smaller. The same condition is to be found in 
practically all manufacturing trades. 

It is beyond question that productive efficiency is essential in 
the average citizen, if he is to be capable of maintaining his 
economic value in the community, and becoming and continu- 
ing, socially and industrially, a sustaining and helpful unit 
rather than a burden. 

The purpose of public school education is to secure in- 
telligent citizenship in a democratic society, whose individuals 
through their suffrage govern and legislate for the Common- 
wealth. The development, training and direction of the intelli- 
gence of pupils should be so conducted as to supplement that 
intelligence with economic efficiency ; and any course of studies 
which ignores this consideration and directs the energies of 
pupils into channels from which the great majority will derive 
no benefit, is, from the economic point of view, a waste of time, 
effort and expense. The ox team has been replaced by the loco- 
motive ; the sailing ship by the 20,000-ton ocean express steamer ; 
scratching the soil to make it produce is not longer profitable, 
but intensive cultivation is required for success. To meet these 
conditions, human quality and ability must be increased; yet 
the essential thing to meet these changed conditions, — the 
industrial training of the children in the school, — has, under 
great difficulty and opposition, only recently been begun. 

Massachusetts is dependent on her industries for her eco- 
nomic well-being; the majority of her citizens are workers in 
those industries. In this industrial Commonwealth it should be 
the function of the schools to train children for the work that 
the majority of them must do. No sane man would attempt to do 
away with public school training for the colleges, and thence 
for the arts, sciences and professions ; but the 95 who must work 
with their hands at manual labor, to live, must not be sacrificed 
to the 5 who need not so work. 

Massachusetts is a community of workers, of producers ; and 
yet until very recent years all the energies of our school sys- 
tem, its efforts, zeal and enthusiasm were diverted from the 
training of efficient industrial units to so-called cultural educa- 
tion. The more urgent needs of the productive vocations have 
been neglected; the mill and shop and farm, the bases of our 



238 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

social life and economic being, have been subordinated. Year 
after year we have turned out thousands of children who are 
unable, for many causes, to attain the professions, and unfitted 
by misdirected education and training for industrial life. Ne- 
cessity compels them to enter into competition with the crowded 
ranks of unskilled workers, or they must enter industrial occu- 
pations" handicapped by ignorance and lack of training; in 
either case their inefficiency makes them a burden to the com- 
munity or an expense to their parents or guardians. 

Educated sufficiently to give them a distaste for manual la- 
bor, which must be the inevitable lot of the majority in all com- 
munities, the products of such a school system are insufficiently 
educated and trained to enter the ranks of skilled labor; their 
future must compass years of idleness or semi-idleness. If in 
the hard school of necessity they do not develop economic effi- 
ciency, they fall back into conditions and circumstances that are 
morally and industrially dangerous to the body politic. Mis- 
direction of education in the public schools is disastrous in its 
effects on morals and industry, and surely leads to unemploy- 
ment, crime and pauperism. The mockery of the plea that the 
poorest shall have an opportunity through education for higher 
and better things lies in the plain fact that our system, as it 
has been, makes its victims discontented with what they have, 
and not fit to attain what they have not. 

So long as the efficient members of every State must carry 
the inefficient on their backs, so long as the productive members 
of society are compelled to support the unproductive, living must- 
continue to cost more than it should. One remedy, a wider 
range in the ideals and methods of public school education, 
which the commission hopes and believes is under way in this 
State, is of intense interest to the citizens who must pay the bill. 
Because it believes that this is one of the causes of a decrease in 
production through the abandonment of the farm and the turn- 
ing over of manufacturing industries to the alien, the commis- 
sion feels that duty requires it to refer to this subject. 



1910.1 HOUSE — No. 1750. 239 



VII. 
INDIVIDUAL WASTAGE. 



A. DRINK. 



It has long been known that the excessive use of alcoholic 
liquor is a menace to the happiness and an injury to the wel- 
fare of those peoples among whom it is prevalent, but not until 
the science of statistics was applied to the problem was the 
magnitude of its economic importance appreciated. Of late 
we have come to know that by sapping vitality, by bringing 
accident, disease and death, it causes economic waste of enor- 
mous proportions. 

The total cost, direct and indirect, of the liquor traffic of 
Massachusetts is beyond the power of man to compute. How 
much of the $19,000,000 annually spent in this State for pub- 
lic and private support of the dependent classes is to be attrib- 
uted to this cause cannot be ascertained, but it is a very large 
percentage, and, huge as the amount is, it is as nothing com- 
pared to the indirect cost. The problems of drink, poverty, 
unemployment, crime, mental and physical unfitness are so 
interwoven that it is practically impossible to separate them. 
Drink in all its combinations adds to every trouble of life, and 
but for it the problems of sickness and old age could be met 
much more easily. The tremendous waste due to intemperance 
constitutes a burden that falls most heavily on those least able 
to bear it. 

Massachusetts was a pioneer in scientific investigation of this 
phase of the question. In 1895 the Bureau of Statistics of 
Labor published the results of an exhaustive study of the re- 
lation of the liquor traffic to pauperism, crime and insanity. 
In the matter of pauperism it found that out of 3,230 paupers 
in the State institutions about 65 in every 100 were addicted to 
the use of liquor, and that about 16 in every 100 of all the 



240 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

paupers were excessive drinkers; about 39 in every 100 attrib- 
uted their pauperism to their own intemperate habits; about 
5 in every 100 considered their pauperism due to the intemper- 
ance of their parents, one or both; and about 1 in every 100 
attributed their pauperism to the intemperance of those upon 
whom they were dependent, other than parents. This made 45 
per cent, of the total who attributed their pauperism to the in- 
temperance of themselves or of others. 

This would indicate little progress since 1821, when a special 
committee of the town of Boston, created to consider the subject 
of " pauperism at large," and headed by Josiah Quincy, reported 
to the Legislature, as the result of the experience of both England 
and Massachusetts, " that of all causes of pauperism, intem- 
perance in the use of spirituous liquors is the most powerful 
and universal." 

In the matter of crime the Bureau of Statistics of Labor 
found that 18,232 out of 26,672 convictions for crime in twelve 
months — about 68 in every 100 — included drunkenness, either 
wholly or in part ; and that in the case of about 84 in every 100 
of all convictions the intemperate habits of the offender led to 
a condition which induced the crime. In 8,440 cases in which 
drunkenness did not form part of the offence, that is, in which 
the offender was convicted of a crime other than drunkenness, 
3,460, or about 43 in every 100, were cases in which the 
offender was under the influence of liquor at the time the offence 
was committed. Nearly 51 in every 100 of the crimes other 
than drunkenness were committed under conditions created by 
the intemperate habits of the criminal. 

The Massachusetts Bureau found, upon investigation of the 
insane in public institutions, that of 897 cases where the facts 
could be determined there were 616, or about 69 in every 100, 
in which one or both parents were intemperate; and that of 
1,506 cases there were 383, or about 25 in every 100, in which 
the intemperate habits of the person were considered the cause 
of insanity. 

The economic effect of all this shows itself in two directions : 
first, in the expense entailed on the community in costs of gov- 
ernment and charity; and second, in the injury to the productive 
efficiency of the community. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 241 

In the matter of direct expenditure, the recent special report 
ef the trustees of the Foxborough State Hospital put the annual 
cost of drunkenness to the citizens of the State at a point far 
beyond $1,000,000. 

As a matter of fact, if drink were to be held responsible for a 
proportion of the public payments — State, county, city and 
town — for penal institutions, police departments, the judiciary, 
asylums, poorhouses, etc., as well as of private charity, corre- 
sponding to the proportion that liquor bears to other causes of 
conviction and commitment, the grand total of expense in Massa- 
chusetts would be found not far from $10,000,000 a year ; and 
if to this we added the cost in disease and death, the total record 
would be appalling. 

The individual wastage through its use is of course beyond 
measurement, but is surely enormous. 

The economic waste of human life is also to be considered. 
Actuaries have determined that in the case of several English 
insurance companies, with statistics of more than forty years, 
non-abstainers have a death rate exceeding that of abstainers by 
23 per cent. Certain authorities have asserted that in alcohol- 
using countries 10 per cent, of all deaths are directly or 
indirectly caused by the use of liquor. In order to ascertain 
the approximate percentage of such deaths in this State, we 
addressed a circular letter of inquiry to Massachusetts medical 
examiners. The replies indicate an average of 16 per cent, in 
the case of 21 districts. 

The cases of death that come under the purview of medical 
examiners are as a rule those resulting from crime, accident or 
sudden and unaccountable causes; and the crimes attributable 
to alcohol are usually those of violence, since alcoholism in 
some produces insane tendencies to violence, and in many a 
mental stupidity or idiocy that destroys or dulls the instincts 
which make for self-preservation and avoidance of danger. 
The judgment of regular practitioners and the records of hos- 
pitals would doubtless give a more accurate knowledge for 
guidance, but these could not be obtained in the time at the 
disposal of the commission. 

The use of alcoholic beverages in this country has rapidly 
increased. That of distilled spirits remains about stationary, 



242 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May.. 



the average retained here for consumption having been 1.45 
gallons per capita in the years 1871-78, and the same in the 
years 1901-08; but the average for malt liquors in the same 
periods rose from 6.72 gallons a year to 18.88 gallons. In 1908 
it was 20.97 gallons. 

Observation leads us to believe that there has been in Massa- 
chusetts a material diminution of public drinking by the well- 
to-do in the last generation, with less use of wine at banquets, 
of punch at college reunions, less resort by business men to pub- 
lic bars, less consumption of hard liquors in clubs. But the 
statistics indicate that there must have been great increase in the 
use of malt liquors in homes, and of resort to saloons by wage 
earners. 



Per Capita Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages in the United States. 



Year. 


Wines 
(Gallons). 


Malt 
Liquors 
(Gallons). 


Spirits 

(Proof 

Gallons). 


Total 
Wines, Malt 

Liquors 
and Spirits 
(Gallons). 


1840, 
1850, 
1860, 
1870, 
1880, 
1890, 
1900, 
1908, 












.29 
.27 
.35 
.32 
.56 
.46 
.39 
.60 


1.36 

1.58 

3.22 

5.31 

8.26 

13.67 

16.02 

20.97 


2.52 
2.23 
2.86 
2.07 
1.27 
1.40 
1.28 
1.44 


4.17 

4.08 

6.43 

7.70 

10.08 

15.53 

17.69 

23.01 



Per Capita Consumption 


of Alcoholic Beverages 


in other Countries, 1902. 


Countries. 


Wines 
(Gallons). 


Beer 
(Gallons). 


Spirits 
(Gallons). 




24.00 

1.14 

27.00 

1.11 

.36 

.09 


4.80 

25.50 

.16 

12.40 

30.30 

5.10 


1.43 


German Empire, 

Italy, 


1.85 
1.27 


Australian Commonwealth, .... 
United Kingdom, 


.85 

1.05 

.80 







With the spread of education and the general progress of 
society, there ought to be a lessening of the evils produced from 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 243 

such a cause as this. We are not of the belief that the primary 
cure is to be found in legislation. Men cannot be made good 
by law. The most important thing is to elevate the standards 
of the community, for its moral sense is the most powerful of 
all agencies. But the strong arm of the law often has to be 
called upon to enforce the common will. If it be the case that 
in the course of a generation and more of universal schooling, 
of intellectual advance and moral growth, we have so progressed 
that public sentiment will support a more rigid application of 
its views on the liquor question, legislation should keep pace 
therewith. In a generation our laws have made no important 
advance in this matter. It may well be considered whether we 
have not reached the point where the more conspicuous of the 
evils may be suppressed, perhaps by abolishing that institution 
peculiar to America, the source of our greatest economic injury 
and private misery, the resort where liquor may be sold with- 
out a genuine use of food, the saloon. 

We heartily indorse the proposals of the trustees of the Fox- 
borough State Hospital for more scientific and effective treat- 
ment of dipsomania, and we believe that their adoption would 
mark a long step toward the treatment of inebriety as a disease 
and not as a crime. 

That alcoholism is a monstrous evil, is beyond question; 
but it is a mere evasion of our humanitarian responsibilities to 
assert that the majority of our criminal evils spring from 
alcoholism. Crime and sin are coeval with humanity; they 
exist in communities where alcoholism is practically unknown ; 
and, while crime and social weakness must always be aggra- 
vated by the waste incidental to alcoholism, the important 
thing is to learn the basic causes of alcoholism. When we learn 
them, and can remove or remedy them, while we may not cure 
crime, we shall at least eliminate many of the conditions that 
fertilize the soil of lawlessness. 

What is the root of the cause of alcoholism, of the craving 
for artificial stimulants ? Alcoholism is, after all, a milder 
though more frequent form of the stimulation which ranges from 
tea and coffee to opium in its many forms and to other poisonous 
drugs. The badly nourished man craves stimulants to give his 
sy-tem what his food lacks, either in quantity or quality. Pov- 



244 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

erty reduces the ability to acquire full and sufficient food; 
disease and physical degeneration may then impair digestion 
and produce malnutrition. The physically inefficient man after 
labor is frequently unable to enjoy the wholesome and nourish- 
ing food of the normal man, if he has it at home, and seeks to 
supply his deficiencies by alcohol. The fact that alcoholism is 
more common among the poorer and industrially low-waged 
classes than in the more comfortable strata of society would seem 
to indicate that alcoholism is an accompanying circumstance of 
the impoverished classes because of the inability of the poor to 
secure enough of nutrition and physical comforts. Physical 
inefficiency produces industrial inefficiency; alcoholism comes 
in as an illusory cure for the former, and in the end aggravates 
the latter. If we raise the physical and productive capacity of 
the man, and thereby increase his economic efficiency and value, 
we place him in a position to minister to his normal necessities 
in a normal way; he can live under sane hygienic conditions, 
and obtain foods that will provide him with the necessary 
nutrition, and the physical craving for stimulation — the il- 
lusory substitute for nutrition — vanishes. 

Drunkenness, therefore, is not wholly a moral question, but 
is largely economic; and it will diminish in proportion as we 
raise the average of social and economic efficiency. The remedy 
for alcoholism must be sought in pathology, rather than in 
theology; in clinical as well as in spiritual methods, supple- 
mented by education and training. 

B. LUXURY. 

The recent period of rising prices has been marked by a 
tendency toward extravagance among all classes, never before 
shown in this country. The rich man, who blames the cost 
of high living on the swill-pails of the poor, does not stop to 
think that in his ostentatious desire to flaunt his wealth he first 
set the bad example, which has filtered down through the 
various strata of our people until it seems that, in the desire to 
meet the standard of some neighbor or social set, all idea of 
thrift has been abandoned. Jones has an automobile; Brown 
mortgages his house to get one. The rational amount of amuse- 
ment and recreation that formerly was accepted as making for 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 245 

contentment and economic efficiency is not regarded as sufficient. 
The wage earner, obliged to buy his coal in 25-pound bags, and 
paying at least one-half more for it than the consumer who buys 
by the half or quarter ton, with most of his other supplies bought 
in like manner, feels keenly the increased price of commodities; 
but this is not allowed to stand in the way of getting money to 
attend the moving-picture shows and buy luxuries, — not occa- 
sionally, but constantly. The workers among the desperately 
poor know best of all how this canker of extravagance, beginning 
with the rich, who are setting the bad example, has permeated 
down through all classes, and the havoc that it has caused. 

Tn the twelve years since the use of self-propelled road 
vehicles became mechanically perfected and commercially prof- 
itable, it is estimated that a million automobiles have been 
produced, and sold for more than a billion and a half dollars. 
In this production France, until 1907, led the world, when it 
was passed by the United States, which is now in the lead. 
The production of automobiles in the United States this year 
will easily approximate $250,000,000. The great bulk of this 
output represents pure luxury production, which has taken at 
least 100,000 workers out of employments in which they were 
producing commodities that were useful and of benefit to all 
the people, into an occupation in which the product may be 
termed an economic waste. The machinist building looms or 
the farmer growing wheat or corn, who goes into automobile 
making, not only lessens the supply of these necessaries of 
life, but increases the weight on the demand side of the ratio. 
So far as these automobiles are useful economically, in that 
they conserve health or make their owners more productive 
in their various occupations or professions, this enormous 
luxury production may be justified; but this is often not 
the case. While the owner of an automobile is undoubtedly 
benefited in health by the enjoyment of this sport, the net result 
of ownership of an automobile may be to make its owner less 
productive. Frequently he uses it under conditions that take 
from his business or profession valuable time that would other- 
wise be given to increase production. This diminution in pro- 
ductivity on the part of the automobile owners must be added 
to the disturbance of the law of supply and demand in the 



246 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

making of automobiles, while the indirect effect of this show 
of luxury upon the poor, causing discontent and its conse- 
quences, is far-reaching. 

In England, France, Germany, Holland, Belgium and Italy 
a similar waste is going on ; millions of dollars a year are being 
taken out of the world's production and put into this special 
luxury, which is used as an example because it is the largest. 

The twelve-million-dollar ship, used only for show purposes, 
whose construction helps nothing except the profit balance of 
the steel makers or the pride of naval display, has diverted the 
labor employed in its construction from useful pursuits, de- 
creased the supply of necessities and increased the demand for 
them. Its upkeep makes the people poorer, because it is 
charged back in taxes that make their burden heavier. Every- 
thing that is true about the warship is measurably true, though 
to a lesser extent, about the uneconomical automobile. 

The progress of civilization has demonstrated that the luxuries 
of to-day are considered the necessities of to-morrow. The 
production of automobiles for commercially economical and 
purely pleasurable purposes is not likely to diminish, but rather 
to increase. Yet it must be said that the present tendency 
toward luxury production entails a penalty that must be paid 
by the whole community in an advance of the prices of the 
necessary things of life. Three hundred years ago an English 
writer said that such luxury " hath honey in her mouth, gall 
in her heart, and a sting in her tail ; " and in this age the 
tendency toward universal extravagance, pleasant as its ap- 
proaches are, and greatly as it throws its gilded charms on the 
world, may enslave men more than the most active vices. 

C. AMUSEMENT. 

In considering the subject of amusement, among the many 
phases of social and individual waste, the character and value 
of amusement as an aid to individual and economic efficiency 
must be reckoned with and estimated. Man is a sentient being, 
not a machine; his day must be divided among work, rest and 
sleep, — differentiating rest and sleep as conscious and uncon- 
scious abstinence from labor. He needs, as plants need, his 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 247 

seasons of light and shade, day and night. We cannot ignore 
either the psychology or the physiology of the man without low- 
ering his efficiency. To put the matter in the proverbial 
phraseology of the race, which expresses a homely wisdom 
gathered in the experience of the ages, " All work and no play 
make Jack a dull hoy." Relaxation from labor is not in itself 
enough to compensate man for the physical exhaustion and 
waste incident to daily work. The mere resting of muscle and 
brain must be supplemented by some form of amusement, some 
pleasure, which makes the worker forget the sweat and fret of 
the day, and carries him into • imaginary regions and conditions 
where labor and its exhaustion are forgotten. 

Amusement, pleasure, is a most important factor in retaining 
and conserving the efficiency of the social units; and wherever 
and whenever man is deprived of what may be termed his 
psychological sustenance, he begins to deteriorate from the 
normal standard of social and economic efficiency. This plain 
and important fact has been recognized by penologists, who deal 
with that most hopeless individual, — the criminal convict. 
Solitary confinement, with its dreadful silence, lack of human 
companionship, and idleness, produce insanity, idiocy, and 
death; and when this form of punishment had been banished, 
and convicts were kept busy in various occupations in order to 
preserve their mental and physical health, it was found neces- 
sary to add certain forms of amusement to their prison routine, 
to conserve their efficiency. 

Libraries, museums and art galleries, in which millions are 
invested and which are only remotely productive, are established 
for the double purpose of educating and pleasing, yet always 
with the nobler hope of stimulating the higher faculties and 
gifts of the people, and of raising the quality of their efficiency. 
While the drama was at one time an important adjunct to re- 
ligion and education, and there are idealists who still labor for 
a return to these dramatic functions and purposes, it would be 
a stretch of imagination in this age to accord the theater any 
higher function than that of furnishing a pleasing relaxation 
from the cares of the day's labor, which makes little tax on the 
intellect or imagination. The dominant notes of the theater in 
the last decade, which has been an age of hurry and unusual 



248 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

industrial productivity, have been frivolity and musical non- 
sense. The theater has almost wholly ceased to be either 
elevating or instructive ; and it has become a resort where people 
go to relax and laugh, and not to think or stimulate brain or 
nerve. In an age and in the centers of population where occu- 
pations are sedentary and indoors, — a neurasthenic age, to be 
plain, — the theater serves a useful purpose in conserving effi- 
ciency, even by its frivolity and inconsequence. 

A certain amount of expenditure for amusement by workers 
of all classes must, then, be regarded as a legitimate and whole- 
some aid to efficiency. Literature, music, drama, athletic sports 
and excursioning are distinctly helpful. A reasonable outlay 
for these things is to be encouraged. It is evident, however, 
that spending for amusement is now carried beyond the line 
that marks off economic from uneconomic expenditure. 

The increase in the number of theaters and show houses from 
75 in 1900 to 242 in 1910 indicates a growth vastly out of pro- 
portion to the growth of population in this Commonwealth, 
and a tendency to extravagance. There were, in 1900, 66 
theaters devoted to what is termed the legitimate ,drama and 
vaudeville, and only 9 houses which catered to cheaper forms 
of amusement. In 1910 we find only 50 theaters and houses 
devoted to drama and vaudeville, while 192 are given over to 
" moving pictures " and cheaper forms of vaudeville. This 
change in public taste may perhaps be attributed in some 
measure to the fact that the theaters of the country have passed 
iwto the hands of trusts and managerial combinations, which 
have raised prices to their patrons without in any way raising 
the character of their dramatic, product. On the other hand, 
the price of entertainment in the moving-picture houses averages 
about 10 cents ; their appeal is to the eye ; they furnish a relaxa- 
tion and pleasure as intellectual and satisfying as the legitimate 
theaters, for 5 per cent, of the cost; and under proper police 
supervision and censorship they are clean and wholesome. The 
increase of the number of houses devoted to amusement is offset 
to some extent by the decrease in prices. 

It should be observed, furthermore, that the increase in the 
number of " motion-picture " houses is largely in cities and 
towns devoted to factory industries, and they furnish amuse- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 249 

ment to classes of workers whose means debar them from 
theaters of the higher class, except on rare occasions. It is 
worthy of note that wherever the " motion-picture " houses are 
opened, the patronage of the liquor saloons in the neighborhood 
shows a falling off ; and it may be said that, with more vigilance 
and activity in police supervision, the causes of complaints 
made against these " motion-picture " places can be removed. 
But, when all possible allowance has been made on these grounds, 
it is clear that the enormous increase of the number of theaters 
and amusement places and of the attendance during recent 
years marks an abnormal development of the appetite for 
amusements, and represents a considerable squandering of in- 
come. 

Another feature of recent development in the recreation field, 
the establishment of summer parks and theaters connected with 
the expansion of the street-railway systems of the State, has 
on the whole been useful and beneficial to the great mass of 
workers, by providing cheap transportation from the stifle and 
dirt of tenement and street to the wholesome and refreshing 
environment of wood and lake and out-of-doors. Workers are 
enabled to secure cheap, healthful and enjoyable outings for 
themselves and their families ; they can rest and relax under 
clean and wholesome conditions ; the amusement furnished is 
pleasant and morally safe; and they bring an increment of 
health, contentment and enjoyment that are of prime impor- 
tance to the efficiency of the community. The beach, parks and 
bathing facilities established and maintained by the State are 
equally valuable and wholesome in their results, and are eco- 
nomically worth every cent expended on them. 

The attendance at base ball and other athletic games hardly 
needs defence ; the games are clean, wholesome and out-of-doors ; 
they stimulate a taste for physical exercise, draw men into the 
air and sunshine, and give pleasure to thousands who have little 
taste for theaters, concert halls, art galleries and museums. 

It is impossible to estimate the amount wasted on amuse- 
ments ; the line between economic and uneconomic expenditure 
on this score is so vague that a curve of waste cannot be plotted. 
One who approaches this question from the point of view of the 
economic interests of society alone is likely to exaggerate the 



250 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

waste and the harm of excessive indulgence in amusements at 
the present day. The immediate waste of income is readily 
apparent ; but the possible gain from the heightened efficiency 
produced by diversion from work-a-day tasks is not so easily 
discerned, and cannot be measured at all. That a deal of waste 
is now taking place in the form of excessive and demoralizing 
expenditure for amusements we believe, however, to be a fact 
patent to any impartial observer. This waste is twofold. It 
involves the unprofitable spending of money which might other- 
wise have been devoted to forms of consumption that would 
heighten efficiency, or to assistance in the production of useful 
commodities, and it diminishes the industrial efficiency and 
consequently the output of the working population. It is 
obviously important to reduce this waste to a minimum, and 
the most helpful agency in this reform lies in the development 
of finer and higher ideals of life and work. 

D. DOMESTIC WASTE. 1 

Domestic waste may be either destruction without profitable 
result, or misuse, the latter taking the form of extravagance. 
Families with incomes below $800 a year waste very little food 
material. They may suffer from illness due to poor food, 
and thus waste income. United States government investiga- 
tions show waste of edible material amounting to not more than 
3 or 4 per cent, in this class. In the case of families with in- 
comes between $1,000 and $3,000 a year, all investigations show 
frequent wastes of 10 to 25 per cent, of foods purchased, and 
extravagance in buying to an equal amount. Such families 
spend from $300 to $800 a year for food. If 20,000 families 
in Boston spend needlessly and to their own detriment $200 a 
year, the sum of $4,000,000 annually is involved, besides the 
cost of caring for garbage and loss through illness. 
Food waste occurs in three principal ways : — 
1. Waste in marketing, including purchase of inedible ma- 
terial, purchase in small quantities, purchase for flavor and 
tenderness instead of nutrition, and sheer extravagance. 

1 The data for this chapter were supplied by Prof. Ellen H. Richards of the Massachusetts 
Institute of Technology. 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



251 



2. Waste in preparation, including preparation of too large 
quantity for the meal or day, food made inedible by poor cooking, 
and food unwholesome by wrong cooking. 

3. Waste in supplies and cooked food, including garbage pure 
and simple, and loss in moving and closing the house for the 
summer, when whole packages are thrown away, etc. 

1. Waste in Marketing. — The following illustrations are 
typical of this form of waste : — 



Rolled oats in a package cost 
Rolled oats in bulk cost 
Macaroni in a package costs . 
Macaroni in bulk costs . 
Some crackers in packages cost 
Same crackers in bulk cost . 



6.6 cents a pound. 

3.5 cents a pound. 

9.0 cents a pound. 

7.0 cents a pound. 
20.0 cents a pound. 
15.0 cents a pound. 



Xote the saving from purchase in quantity. 

For a family of five persons, butter bought in a 5-pound box 
at 40 cents lasts a week ; if bought by the one-half pound or the 
pound, 6% pounds at 42 cents are used; the saving in a year 
will be about $35. During the week of April 4 to 9, flounder 
and cod could be purchased for 5 cents a pound, while halibut 
was 17 cents. Lamb by the hindquarter for the same time was 
bought in a certain market for -20 cents. Fifteen pounds of 
lamb hindquarter cost $3, and, cut into 4% pounds of chops, at 
30 cents, cost $1.35 ; 10y 2 pounds of leg, at 25 cents, cost $2.62 ; 
total, $3.97 ; saving, 32 per cent. Fifteen pounds of ham at 22 
cents a pound cost $3.30, and yield 4 pounds of shank, at 7 cents 
a pound, 28 cents; 11 slices at 33 cents, $3.63; total, $3.91; 
saving, 27 per cent. Ten pounds of turnips at 1 cent a pound 
cost 10 cents; bought by the pound, at 2 cents, the cost is 20 
cents ; saving, 50 per cent. The purchasing of canned goods by 
the dozen saves the price of one or two cans. As one house- 
wife suggests, these savings counted in cents seem small, but 
if computed on percentages of the cost, they bulk large. The 
savings illustrated above amount to from 20 to 50 per cent, on 
the purchase, and these percentages, applied to a family ex- 
penditure of say $400 a year for food, would mean from $80 to 
$200 a year, — no small item. 

A government dietary study showed that 16 pounds of beef 



252 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

bought at wholesale for a students' club, at 14 cents a pound, 
cost $2.24. Of the 4/4 pounds of trimmings wasted, 2 pounds 
was edible material, costing 28 cents, or 12% per cent, of the 
material wasted. 

One housewife writes, concerning the waste in marketing : — 

The trend of the times goes to have everything put up in small 
packages, to save time in handling; but when one can buy in bulk, 
one can save far more than the careless or thoughtless buyer dreams 
of. For instance, if one buys a pail of lard, weighing from 1 to 3 
pounds, one pays 20 cents a pound; by taking 50 pounds, one gets 
the best quality at 4 cents discount. One who buys an 80-pound bag 
of flour pays 90 cents; one buying a half -barrel bag saves 20 or 
30 cents. It has come to pass that any poor man's family sees fruit 
of all kinds brought to the doors now, and all must have it. They want 
a banana pudding, whether they can buy shoes or not. I can see that 
right here in the country everything goes towards keeping up the cost 
of living, and there is lots of waste. Half the people don't consider 
that at all; they are not taught, as I was, that it is wrong to waste 
anything, no matter how small, for some one might need it. 

2. Waste in Preparation. — There are few skilled cooks in 
small families, few who know how to plan just enough. Also, 
the rapid introduction of the gas stove, while a great convenience 
and saving of time, causes much loss in burned food. The 
attempt to prepare food from untried receipts, to suit a new 
mistress, swells the bulk of garbage. Wrong proportion of 
ingredients is responsible for much illness, with its consequent 
waste. 

3. Waste in Supplies and Cooked Food. — The housewife's 
greatest sin is in lack of oversight. The business man has 
learned that a superintendent pays. The housewife has even 
allowed herself to be shut out of her own kitchen and pantry; 
she does not know what is done with the meats and groceries 
that she pays for. The tastes of the men and maids regulate 
the bills of most families. 

The thrifty housewife, who has some knowledge and the will 
to save, uses all but % to 1 per cent, of the edible food she buys. 
The average housewife, who does her own work, wastes 8 to 10 
per cent., largely in meat and bread; bread pudding is to-day 
a despised dish, as is hash. A careful record of a foot ball team, 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 253 

who had everything freshly cooked, as is the habit of a large 
number of families to-day, showed 18 per cent, waste. In 
Boston, $300,000 worth of grease is estimated to be thrown away 
in the swill, and such part as is recovered is sold. The garbage 
is treated by private concerns, and yields between 3 and 4 per 
cent, by weight of merchantable grease, which could yield 
6,500,000 pounds if all the garbage were treated that way, 
selling at about 4.5 cents per pound. This grease is used for 
making oil, candles and soap, which are sold to householders. 
The latter thus pay again for what they throw away. Soap- 
making is a commercial by-product. This suggests the possi- 
bility of a revival of domestic by-products, now gone out of 
fashion. 

The waste through servants is emphasized in a letter from a 
housewife, as follows : — 

It seems to me that the elimination of waste is nearly impossible in 
households where there are numerous servants; at least, I have found 
it so, with only one, and the waste rises in geometrical progression 
with the number employed. I have now been doing- my own cooking 
for nearly a year, and I feed my family twice as well on about two- 
thirds of the cost. A large part of the saving comes in the economical 
use of meat. I make a delicious dinner with a few scraps of meat 
that a cook would give to the dog. 

Then I depend a good deal on soups, which I invent to suit my 
larder. A few cold baked beans, with a little tomato and a bit of 
meat on a bone, or a little left-over gravy, make a soup that all eat 
with much pleasure, and it is so nourishing that it goes far to make 
the dinner. . . . Most people do not understand how different a soup 
is when it has simmered a good many hours. The soup that has been 
boiled fast a couple of hours will taste flat and uninteresting, whereas 
the same soup five hours later will have such a delicious blend of 
flavors that all you know is that it is nice, without being able to dis- 
tinguish the ingredients. Again, it is time that counts. . . . Cooks 
waste the coffee and tea horribly. Mix the coffee with cold water the 
night before, with an egg-shell, and bring it to a boil in the morning, 
and you do not need a gTeat deal for a good cup of coffee. The tea 
in the kitchen is piled into the tea-pot and thrown out with but little 
of the goodness extracted. Another frightful waste is the coal. I 
use less than half as much as any girl I ever had, and my stove bakes 
better. I never complain of the draft, as she does or did after burn- 
ing all the goodness out of her coal in the first hour after lighting 1 . 

There is no way that I know of to eliminate waste except by looking 
after things yourself. This is disagreeable and practically impossible 



254 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

with the average type of servant. This type is created by the lazy, 
supercilious, absolutely stupid type of mistress, who will not touch 
anything with the tips of her dainty fingers, and reserves the right of 
despising the person who does it for her. Just hear any of them talk 
about their servants when they are together! I always feel like telling 
them they have exactly what they deserve. If they could organize 
their households on a business basis, with the same consideration and 
respect for their employees that a successful business man shows, and 
the proper supervision that any business requires, the matter could 
be adjusted on a more satisfactory basis, and a different class of girls 
would be willing to take the positions. 

The main causes of waste in marketing, kitchenette and 
storage facilities are to be found in social conditions over which 
the individual has no control. The crowded living conditions, 
whether in tenement or in apartment, demand the kitchenette, 
which has no place for the barrel of flour, the bucket of corn 
meal, the quarter of lamb. The high temperature of the apart- 
ment house prohibits any storage over twelve hours. Ice costs 
more than food. The necessity of purchase in small quanti- 
ties comes with the kitchenette and the small ice box ; even dry 
foods become stale and absorb odors in the hot and steamy little 
boxes that do duty to-day. The saving in rent costs in food 
supplies; the package and the kitchenette go together. In a 
large household with several in the kitchen the " left-overs " are 
eaten at the second table, but a family with one servant cannot 
count on any left overs being eaten in the kitchen. " It is my 
constant endeavor to prepare of each article for each meal only 
as much as will be eaten at that meal, so that no second handling 
may be required." The apartment-house woman buys ready- 
cooked foods as she comes home from the city, not thinking that 
one-third of the amout would have served had she considered it 
her duty to stay in and prepare it. 

Social causes also play a large part in the waste of cooked 
foods. The waste of edible food material is found to be from 
1 to 40 per cent, of the amount purchased. To save 5 cents 
worth may require 25 cents worth of time; and time is the 
thing to be saved in America to-day, at the cost of food, of 
happiness, of life itself ! 

A potent cause of high cost of food, as well as of waste 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 255 

in edible material, is the recent and increasing demand for 
perishable foods. Just as the demand for sirloin steak and 
breast of chicken means that one-sixth of the carcass must be 
made to yield the price, so the demand for southern and hothouse 
fruits and vegetables raises the price. 

The social standard of " leisure " costs much. " To putter 
all day " over cooking such materials as take time is a degrading 
task, relegated to the window with a large family or to the 
niggardly. In whatever direction one turns, the present waste of 
food, which is nearly one-half of the total consumption for one- 
third of the families living below a $5,000 income and for two- 
thirds of those between $1,000 and $3,000, is due to social 
causes much more than to mere ignorance. The greater part 
of the increased amount paid for food by the average family 
with an income of $1,000 to $3,000 can hardly be classed 
under the head of actual waste of food material, but it must 
be put under the class of unnecessary expense, of extrava- 
gance and luxurious living. The following comparison, in 
another letter from a housewife, voices the experience of 
many : — 

We are all grown luxurious; little by little it has come about, and 
we are almost unconscious that a change has been made. When I 
first began to keep house, ten years ago, we ate cereal, egg's and coffee 
for breakfast, with fruit occasionally instead of cereal; but now we 
must have grape fruit every morning, eggs and bacon and hot muffins. 
We are no better off as far as being nourished goes, but we just some- 
how want it, and two grape fruit cost as much as did the whole break- 
fast ten years ago. Then, when I go to market and see fresh beans, 
cucumbers' and spinach, I buy them without really stopping to think; 
so easily tempted are we. 

Many men frown on twice-cooked meat, and do not as a rule 
care for " made dishes ; " so that the wife with a thrifty soul 
soon tires of throwing away not only the food but the time she 
lias spent. Only the highest skill can save in the French fashion. 
It takes a $5,000 wife to live on $500 a year, as a shrewd 
observer remarked on leaving the " workman's cottage " at the 
Chicago Exposition, where a college-trained woman showed the 
actual working of such an income. Such a training takes time, 



256 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

and such -skill means taking pains in each small detail. To 
save time and trouble the average American will spend any 
money that he has, without regard to his future needs. 

A certain social standing is kept up by maids and cooks for 
their negligent employers. Just as a man's business standing 
is judged by his wife's clothes, so a new neighbor is classed by 
what the garbage collector called " swell swill." 

Thrift as a religious duty is no longer inculcated in family, 
church or school. It is easier and quicker to buy a new chair, 
a new coat or a new dress, than to repair the partly damaged 
one. It is easier and quicker to go around the corner and buy 
a steak or chop which will cook in ten minutes, than to make a 
palatable stew from yesterday's roast by adding a dozen in- 
gredients to go with the pieces. The American people seem to 
agree with their distinguished fellow citizen, Count Rumford* 
who wrote : " I am happy when I find that improvement leads 
to economy; but I have always thought that excellence should 
never be sacrificed to paltry savings in anything, and least of 
all in those habitual enjoyments which are at the same time the 
comforts and consolations of life." Highly relished food counts 
as comfort and consolation with most of us. One housekeeper 
for a Boston family, when consulted, replied : " My only problem 
for this family is to spend as much as I can on the table." 

These social causes include wrong notions about food. For 
instance, what is waste ? Even intelligent cooks do not, in gen- 
eral, believe that rice and white flour are " nutritious." " Nour- 
ishing food " has come to mean cream, eggs and steak, — an 80- 
cent dietary. Beans, brown bread, turnips and cabbage, at 15 
cents, is " indigestible fare," also " coarse " and below the 
social level. Delicate food materials belong to the class of ex- 
ploited products. " The newest is the best " from automobiles 
to breakfast foods. Advertising means quick sales, before the 
people find out the facts. This frequently trebles the price. 

As for remedies of domestic waste, the cult of national vitality 
must be brought into play, and saner, more scientific ideas of 
food values must be inculcated. The increasing struggle for the 
best, without knowledge of what the best is, must give way to 
the guiding rule of action: thrift or value, not waste. For 
example, let the knowledge be spread that to pay protein prices- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 257 

for fat and bone is not wise economy. James J. Hill's dictum 
deserves circulation : " Let the rule be that every dollar un- 
profitably spent marks a crime against posterity, just as much 
as does the dissipation of material resources." The cost of 
perishable meats, in distinction from dried, salted or smoked, 
is one case in point; fruit and vegetables are also enormously 
expensive. The belief that these foods make better, stronger, 
happier men has been skilfully fostered. The wholesomeness of 
the monotonous fare of the fathers has been denied, and the 
abundance of the modern table praised, as evidence of our ad- 
vanced civilization. Serious degeneration is beginning to show, 
and the health and efficiency league of iVmerica may be able to 
stem the tide. 

Education in food values, a new definition of " nutritive," 
better cooking of standard foods, will lead to a wiser expen- 
diture. 

There should, furthermore, be an accepted standard of the 
proportion of income allowable to spend for food. One-quarter 
is sufficient between $1,500 and $3,000 ; 30 to 40 per cent, for 
those on a lower income. Finally, it is not only the instruc- 
tion of girls in cooking or in the more important economic 
art of buying wisely, but also the enlightenment of the leaders 
of social habits and opinions on true food values that is needed. 



258 COST OF LIVING. [May, 



VIII. 

CHANGES IN SUPPLY. 



A. DRAIN OF POPULATION FROM THE LAND. 

One of the outstanding facts of the social history of the 
last half-century is the rapid growth of large cities. The pro- 
portion of the total population of the United States living in 
cities of 8,000 inhabitants and over increased from 12.5 in 
1850 to 33.1 in 1900. In Massachusetts the urban population 
grew even faster than in the country at large. In 1850 the 
percentage of the population in this State found in cities of 
8,000 inhabitants and over was 36.75, in 1905, the year of 
the last State census, it was 77.74. In other words, only about 
one-third of the population was living in cities in 1850, while 
more than three-fourths of the population is found in such cities 
at the present time. 

Many causes have combined to bring about this striking 
change in distribution of population between city and country. 
The main factors have been the expansion of manufactures, 
promoting concentration of workers in industrial centers; im- 
provement of transportation facilities, increasing the mobility 
of the population ; growth of foreign immigration, adding enor- 
mously to the lower ranks of labor in the great cities ; and the 
lure of city life in general. The effect of this drain of popu- 
lation has been registered plainly in a diminished supply of 
food products. 

The following tables show the growth of urban population 
for the United States and for Massachusetts : — 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



259 





Total and Urban Population of United States, 1790-1900} 


Census Years. 


Total 
Population. 


Urban 
Population. 


Number 
of Cities. 


Per Cent, 
of Urban of 

Total 
Population. 


1790 


3,929,214 


131,472 


6 


3.4 


1800, 














5,308,483 


210,873 


6 


4.0 


1810, 














7,239,881 


356 : 920 


11 


4.9 


1820, 














9,638,453 


475,135 


13 


4.9 


1830, 














12,866,020 


864,509 


26 


6.7 


1840, 














17,069,453 


1,453,994 


44 


8.5 


1850, 














23,191,876 


2,897,586 


85 


12.5 


1860, 














31,443,321 


5,072,256 


141 


16.1 


1870, 














38,558,371 


8,071,875 


226 


20.9 


1880, 














50,155,783 


11,318,547 


286 


22.6 


1890, 














62,622,250 


18,272,503 


447 


29.2 


1900, 














75,477,467 


24,992,199 


545 


33.1 



i Twelfth Census of United States, 1900, Vol. I., p. lxxxiii. 

Total and Urban Population of Massachusetts, 1790-1 905. } 



Census Years. 


Total 
Population. 


Urban 
Population. 


Number 
of Cities. 


Per Cent, 
of Urban of 

Total 
Population. 


1790 


378,787 


18,320 


1 


4.84 


1800, 














422,845 


34,394 


2 


8.13 


1810, 














472,040 


46,400 


2 


9.83 


1820, 














523,287 


56,029 


2 


10.71 


1830, 














610,408 


84,070 


3 


13.77 


1840, 














737,699 


199,694 


10 


27.07 


1850, 














994,515 


365,509 


17 


36.75 


1860, 














1,231,066 


541,339 


23 


43.97 


1870, 














1,457,351 


798,297 


32 


54.78 


1880, 














1,783,085 


1,107,032 


37 


62.09 


1890, 














2,238,943 


1,564,931 


47 


69.90 


1900, 














2,805,346 


2,132,623 


56 


76.02 


1905, 














3,003,680 


2,335,091 


60 


77.74 



1 Census of Massachusetts, 1905, Vol. I., p. xxxi. 



Massachusetts is one of five States in which more than 50 
per cent, of the population is urban. Furthermore, the per- 



260 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



centage of urban population in Massachusetts for 1900, 76 per 
cent., is larger than that of any other State in the Union, with 
the exception of Rhode Island. If the population of cities of 
5,000 to 8,000 inhabitants is included, the percentage of urban 
population is increased to 85.72 in 1905. Moreover, while the 
population of the whole State has increased more than three- 
fold between 1850 and 1905, the rural population has hardly 
increased at all since 1850, and is less than it was in 1855 by 
over 20,000. 

The following table shows the relative rates of increase in 
urban and rural population in the United States, together with 
the rates of increase in 124 large cities : — 





Percentage 


Increases of Urban and Rural 


Population 


l 






Total 






Total 




Yeaes. 


Population. 


Urban. 


Rural. 


of 124 Large 

Cities. 


1790-1800 




35.10 


60.0 


34 


74.4 


1800-1810 
1810-1820 












36.38 
33.07 


69.0 
33.0 


35 
33 


51.1 
36.4 


1820-1830 












33.55 


82.0 


31 


52.0 


1830-1840 












32.67 


68.0 


30 


61.6 


1840-1850 












35.87 


99.0 


30 


82.2 


1850-1860 












35.58 


75.0 


30 


60.8 


1860-1870 












22.63 


59.0 


15 


46.9 


1870-1880 












30.08 


40.0 


27 


38.8 


1880-1890 












24.86 


61.0 


15 


47.7 


1890-1900 




26.70 


36.8 


13 


33.0 



1 Compiled from Table XVIII., in A. F. Weber, " Growth of Cities," the figures for 1900 being 
added from the twelfth census returns. 



Another table is given below, showing the distribution of pop- 
ulation and rates of increase in cities of 25,000 inhabitants and 
over, classified according to size. The most rapid increase is 
in the three largest cities with population of over 1,000,000. 
Next to these in rate of increase come the cities with population 
between 25,000 and 200,000. ~No accurate comparisons can be 
made as to the relative growth of cities of corresponding classes 
in the decades 1880-90 and 1890-1900, because of changes of 
cities from one class to another. In general, the rate of increase 
of all the cities fell off considerably in the decade 1890-1900, 
as compared with the preceding decade, the single exception 
being the city of New York. 



1910.1 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



261 



o 

s 

ft, 

o 

























? 


CN 


o 


o 


^ 


US 


<M 


-H 


CO 


us 


o 


_,' 


OS 


t^. 


o 


fj 


OS* 


^H 


00 


OS 


e 


a> 


CO 


US 


CM 


■«*< 


Tt< 


[^ 


us 


CO 




S 




















00 

H 
00 

<! 
H 
« 
o 

55 


Ph 










































co 


OS 


CO 


CM 


Si 


CO 


o 


CM 


t» 






■a 




t- 


us 


C33 


CO 


CO 


CO 


a> 


t^ 




o 




OS 




>co 


co 


OS 


Xi 




















us 


co 


OS 


o 


as" 


OS 


oo" 


oo 


oo" 


OS 


OS 


00 


— . 


OS 


OS 


OS 


us 


CN 


3 


us 


t~ 


CM 


CO 




t- 


CO 


00 


OS 




& 


















•^<" 


1 


co 




















§ 


i-H 


^ 


CO 


CO 


US 


M< 


rt 


T-H 


CO 


en 


o 


t-- 


OS 


CO 


t^ 


00 


CO 


_,' 


CO 


(M 




CO 


CO 


CN 


CM 


CN 


oo 


CO 


CO 


CO 
























8 

CO 


Ph 






























































a> 

,0 


00 


so 


,_, 


CO 


CO 


(M 


OS 


■* 


CO 




oo 


us 


o 






co 


CO 


CN 


US 


•>^, 


** 


^p 


e» 


CO 


°°. 


, ~i 


US_ 




« 


S 


OS 


US* 


o 


cm 


CO 


23 


OJ 


CO 








3 




t~ 




c 




o 


us 


3 


os 


CO 


CO 


■* 


CO 


CO 


t>. 


CO 


£ 
























00 


us 


o 


r^ 


CO 


CO 


OS 


o 


00 






OS 


us 


t^ 


CO 




CO 


o 


-* 








to 


CO 


SO 


t« 


US 




CO 


oo 


CO 




s 

oo 
























o 


US 


o 




os 


00 








OS 


us 


s 


CO 


us 


o 


CO 


US 


US 








OS 


o 


o 


CO 




ess 










































OS 


55 




■^ 


-t- 


CO 


OS 


us 


CO 


OS 


OS 


CM 


o 








X 


CO 


r- 


US 


co 


o 


CO 








00 


BO 


us 




CO 








§ 


© 

3 


fc 


co 


-d" 


,_" 


co" 


oo" 


r^T 


CO 


CO 


o 


-+< 




us 


us 


a 


CO 


co 


o 


PL) 


us 




CO 


CO 


us 


co> 


o 




as 
























CN 


CM 


1-1 


' H 


T ~ l 


1-1 


CN1 


<M 


^J 


o 






















Ph 
























CN 


CM 


t^ 


US 


CO 


CO 


00 


CO 


00 






o 


r» 


oo 


US 


OS 


CO 


CO 


CO 








CN 


CN 


o 


** 




us 


CO 


OS_ 


CO 




























(-- 


N 


us 




CO 


cnT 


cri" 


Cs" 






co 


OS 


Tf< 


<M 


C75 




o 


co 


us 






OJ 


O 


t> 


OS 




r-- 


oo 


!>•_ 


























CO 


CM 










CM 


cm" 


OS 


CO 


03 
CO 




















,Q 




^ 


CM 


CO 


US 


oo 


OS 


O 


CO 


OS 


£ 


6 














■* 


00 




3 


















"-< 


fc 


o 




















a 


i 




















b 


H 




















O 


1 










































a 


2 




8 


o 

o 


o 

cz 


o 

— 


o 

o 


s 


o 




e 


J 




o 


o 


3 


o 


o 


C3 


























& 






o 


o 


o 


© 


o 


O 


o 




1 




= 


s 


a 


o 


o 


= 


us 










CP 


o 


us 


CO 


<M 








& 


1 




cm 


,_" 




































5 


j 




t* 


(-. 


u 


u 


u 












o 


<y 


CO 


CO 


£ 


CO 


<v 






-a 


TJ 




T3 




— 


-a 




< 






3 


3 


(3 


3 


a 


3 


a 




i- 


1 


o 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 




C 


) 


— 


~3 


T3 


T3 


-d 


T5 


73 


T3 








s 


a 


3 


a 


3 


3 


3 


3 








e3 


S3 


c3 


a 


S3 


S3 


c3 


c3 








o 
o 


o 
— 


§ 


o 
— 


o 

s 


o 
cr 


O 

s 


§ 








o 


o 


O 


o 


- 


c 


o 






























© 


s 


e 


o 


o 


o 


o 


us 


^2 






o 


s 


o 


o 


g 


US 


CN 


'el 






o 


o 


US 


CO 


CN 












CO 
















o 










u 


u 


u 


t-. 


hi 




H 








o 


<s 


CO 


a> 


OJ 


a> 


Q> 










> 


> 


> 




> 


> 


> 










O 


o 


o 


O 


O 


O 


o 





262 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

In connection with the figures of city growth, the statistics 
of occupations are extremely significant, as showing the bearing 
of the changed distribution of population on the production of 
the food supply. In general, there has taken place a great de- 
cline in the number of persons engaged in agricultural pursuits, 
and a corresponding increase in the number of those employed 
in urban occupations. In the United States the proportion of 
population employed in agricultural pursuits fell off from about 
one-half in 1870 to little more than one-third in 1900. In Mas- 
sachusetts the percentage engaged in agricultural pursuits de- 
clined from 12.6 in 1870 to 5 in 1905. This decrease was not 
only relative, but absolute. The comparison cannot be carried 
back further than 1870, because of changes in census methods 
of classifying occupations. 

The general features for the period covered by the occupa- 
tion statistics are: (1) a marked relative decrease of food pro- 
ducers; (2) a relative increase of persons engaged in manufac- 
turing industries up to 1890, and particularly in the decade 
1880-90; (3) a slight decrease in the latter class since 1890; 
(4) a relative increase of consumers during the entire period, as 
represented by other occupation classes, especially professional 
service and trade and transportation. Massachusetts, as com- 
pared with the country at large, has a much smaller proportion 
of agricultural workers, about one-twentieth, as against over one- 
third ; and a much larger proportion of manufacturing and me- 
chanical workers, about one-half, as against one-fourth. The 
professional classes also are more numerous in Massachusetts 
than in the United States as a whole. 

The following tables, compiled from the reports of the United 
States and Massachusetts census, show the changing distribu- 
tion of population according to occupations : — 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



263 



OQ 





a 
















t>. 


CO 


CM 


•* 


■^ 


O 




O 


»« 


rr< 


a 


CO 


<* 


O 




















































Ph 














o 
















5 






























*■* 




i» 


<T3 


r^ 


s 


N 


t^ 


































S 

3 

125 






















CD 
























CM 




fr- 


O 




















o 




kQ 




t". 


CM 




a 
















t» 


i-H 


o 


ee 


o 


O 




O 


t^ 






-<f 


in 


o 


















































s 


Ph 














s 




CO 


CO 


CM 


CM 


co 


^^ 


























CO 




•*r 


CO 




.O. 


























"3 




a 
















US 


ea 


CXI 


CO 


CO 




















S3 


00 






CO 


IO 


<M 




"3 
















CO 


»o 


fr- 


t^ 


00 


O 




o 


■<*< 




o> 


O 


^H 


g 


















































Ph 




























































00 






















CM 












h 










CN1 


a> 




















a 

3 


















S 




















































S3 






CO 




co 






















■>n 


ie 




IO 


CD 


o 




o 


t-- 


_« 






,_| 


o 








CM 






CNI 






































Ph 














© 
































00 
























1 






CO 
























t^ 




cn 




co 




a 




J 




^ 


r^ 






<M 


co 




Ol 


O 


o 












t^ 


IO 


















S3 


"3 


ea 






cm 


CM 


oo 














£ 














o 






































s 




Ph 








d 


d 

c3 




o 
o 
o 


'3 

03 

a 


-i. 

> 
© 

DO 


"3 
a 
o 

co 
H 
© 

a 
-a 


"= 

u 
o 
a 

S 

-a 
§ 

© 

•a 


© 

a 

a 

03 
U 

a 






63 

3 
'S 


"3 
a 
o 

1 

o 


d 

,s 

1 

3 

o 


3 

o 

*3 
d 

C3 


03 

3 

o 
H 






«: 


Ph 


(-1 


H 


s 







IS 

s 


d 
© 
U 

Ph 


o © co co »■* 


© 




IO t- OS CM CO 

— < CM ■>*< 


o 
© 




© 

a 

d 
S3 


64,962 

90,140 

250,000 2 

293,137 

596,562 


© 

00_ 
CM 








i 


a 
© 
O 
u 
© 
Ph 


W5 O -H IO OS 


© 




io io C5 co eo 

rt CM ■** 


| 




© 

a 

d 
S3 


66,551 

60,603 

231,003 

283,474 

566,860 


OS 

s 

CM 








e 

oo 


d 
© 
O 

u 
© 
Ph 


i-l T*< CM O CO 


© 




t^ -*< 00 O © 
y-i CM «0 


© 
O 


CO 
CO 

e 

co 

CO 

* 


© 

a 

d 
S3 


69,720 

43,247 

179,004 

196,513 

493,960 


CM 

00 

© 


e 

00 
00 


■4J 

d 
© 
O 
u 

p3 


9.0 
23.6 

16.0 
51.4 


© 

© 

© 


CO 

CO 

•<s> 

00 

"•to 

g 

&3 


© 

a 

d 
S3 


64,973 
170,160 

115,376 
370,265 


© 

CM 


o 

53 




© 

00 


© 
© 

Ph 


12.6 
22.6 

14.3 
50.5 


© 

o 

o 


o 


© 

a 

d 


72,810 
131,291 

83,078 
292,665 


oo 

oT 

"3 




S3 

o 

2 

P 

O 

o 
o 










Agricultural pursuits, 
Professional services, 
Domestic and personal, 1 . 
Trade and transportation, . 
Manufacturing and mechanical, 


o 
H 



-a 

* o 
a<3 



o o 

-d c3 

. £2 



ac 
"Si 



a? 

Q © 



03^ 



264 COST OF LIVING. [May, 



B. EXHAUSTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES. 

Under the well-known law of diminishing returns, a common- 
place of economic g science, as population grows, recourse must 
be had to poorer soils or those less favorably situated. This 
may be delayed by agricultural invention or development, such 
as the devising of better implements or the learning of better 
methods of husbandry. But unless these obstacles intervene, 
the law is sure to work. 

This is what has happened in America. From the earliest 
settlements on the Atlantic coast until within the last few 
years there were at all times great areas of unoccupied lands 
open to the settler without price, or at the nominal prices 
offered by railroads as they were extended over the prairies. 
Thousands upon thousands of emigrants from the eastern States 
and from Europe spread over the land, in such numbers that 
production outran demand, until corn sold at 10 or 12 cents a 
bushel in the western central States, and at times was burned 
for fuel, because it was cheaper than coal or wood. 

All this has changed. The pioneer has reached the last 
frontier. The overflow of population from countries where land 
is scarce has at last filled our vast areas, and now in turn is 
sweeping over the boundary into the plains of the Canadian 
northwest. Yet the influx from the older countries continues. 
The hamlets of the west have become towns; the towns have 
become cities. The west has now an urban population of its 
own to feed, besides filling the mouths of millions in the cities 
of the seaboard. 

We have come at last to the time when even a bumper crop, 
as the phrase goes, is little more than the supply for a year. 
A shortage makes trouble. Even slight diminutions are felt 
more keenly than actual crop failures of but a few years ago. 
We are facing the virtual disappearance of desirable free land, 
the breaking up of the cattle ranges into farms, the impoverish- 
ment of the soil in the Mississippi valley, the mowing of the 
forests of Maine, Michigan, Oregon and Washington. The new 
development of dry farming and the irrigation projects of the 
far west will perhaps for a time match the march of population, 
but in the end the birth rate will control. It is said that the 



1910. 



HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 



265 



area of all the arid lands that can be made available by irriga- 
tion will not exceed that of Illinois. The staple grains and 
food animals will always be raised on lands for the most part 
already occupied. 

Proof that the home demand for the products of the soil is 
outstripping the home supply is to be found in the figures of 
imports. Xote these comparisons : — 



Imports for Consumption. 

Breadstuffs 

Meat and dairy products 

Vegetables, 

Wood, and manufactures of wood, 



1899. 



1909. 



5940,364 
1,950,835 
2,170,959 
8,241,250 



$5,190,354 
6,503,773 
8,029,748 

30,642,780 



The value of the agricultural exports of domestic products 
for the year ending June 30, 1909, was $903,000,000, or $151,- 
000,000 below the highest record of 1907, and $114,000,000 
below the next highest in 1908. The imports of agricultural 
products were never so high in value as they were in 1909, the 
amount being $637,000,000. 

In 1899 the United States planted about 157,600,000 acres 
of corn, wheat, oats, barley and rye. The yield averaged 22% 
bushels to the acre, aggregating 3,519,000,000 bushels, of 
which we exported about 356,240,000 bushels. In 1909 the 
acreage of these cereals had increased to more than 197,000,- 
000 acres. The yield to the acre was slightly larger than in 
1899; the aggregate production, 4,719,000,000 bushels; but 
our exports were only 112,140,000 bushels, — a decrease of 
68% per cent. Although the yield of the cereals to the acre 
as yet shows no widespread lessening, it is certain that we have 
passed the point of unaided fertility in the case of much the 
greater part of our soil. In Xew England we passed it years 
ago. The proof is to be found in the abandonment of farms 
and the reduction in the amount of improved acreage. The 
reduction in this acreage in Xew England from 1880 to 1900 
was: — 



266 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



States. 


1880. 


1890. 


1900. 


Maine, 


3,484,908 


3,044,666 


2,386,889 


New Hampshire, 












2,308,112 


1,727,387 


1,076,879 


Vermont, . 












3,286,461 


2,655,943 


2,126,624 


Massachusetts, 












2,128,311 


1,657,024 


1,292,132 


Rhode Island, . 












298,486 


274,491 


187,354 


Connecticut, . 












1,642,188 


1,379,419 


1,064,525 


Totals, 


13,148,466 


10,738,930 


8,134,403 



Of course this is in part to be explained by tbe competition 
of tbe west and tbe attraction of city wages, but that is not tbe 
wbole explanation. Thousands of farms bad " run down," and 
the chance of profit was not large enough to make the cost of 
refertilization an attractive investment. 

To meet the conditions of a demand that was increasing at 
tbe same time that the power of the soil to respond was dimin- 
ishing, two courses were open, — help for tbe farmer and help 
for the soil. To the aid of the farmer came American inven- 
tive genius. The elaborate inquiry made by the United States 
Bureau of Labor showed in 1898 that, in the matter of 27 agri- 
cultural processes studied, one man could, with the aid of the 
improved agricultural machinery then in use, cultivate and har- 
vest nearly twice as large a crop as was possible under tbe 
primitive method. By so much were lessened the effect of 
diminishing fertility and the need of recourse to poorer or more 
remote land. Doubtless other inventions will lessen farm labor 
further, but it is doubtful if we soon repeat tbe achievements 
of the mowing machine, the reaper, the seeder, the thresher, the 
gang-plow and all the other devices that helped to conquer the 
plains of the west. 

Help for the soil came only with dire necessity. For years 
the farmer bad no motive to till his land with care or to 
feed it. A more scientific agriculture would have raised crops 
that nobody wanted to eat. Land free or at a nominal price 
asked no thought of interest on money borrowed or profits on 
capital invested. Had tbe early settlers of east or west been 
compelled to put back into the soil the fertility they took out, 
they would in many cases have found their products selling be- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 267 

low cost. For years they worked their lands without reduction 
of return, and for many years with but a small reduction. It 
was more profitable to do this than to use fertilizers. So they 
robbed the earth. 

Such agriculture is like mining, in that it removes wealth 
that it does not replace. Every crop takes mineral wealth out of 
the soil. In the west it has been learned that no lands are good 
enough to endure a quarter of a century of grain crops and 
nothing else. One field at the University of Illinois has raised 
corn for thirty years successively, and it has declined in yield 
on the average a bushel a year, though it was superior land at 
the beginning, and was " too rich ever to wear out." 

At last we have reached the point where we must make a 
general practice of replacing the fertilizing material stored 
by nature and removed by past generations. Rotations of crops 
and better cultivation may let us prolong the process, but it will 
be by enabling us to reach deeper stores of minerals. Sooner 
or later absolutely new supplies must be brought to the soil. 
This costs money. 

The revival of a worn-out farm takes time as well as capital. 
The high prices of to-day will stimulate agriculture everywhere, 
and in some lines it can respond quickly ; but to cure the basic 
trouble is a matter of years and many dollars. By the time the 
investments of to-day bring noteworthy returns, new demands 
will be confronting the supply. There is no danger of over- 
production. 

There is need to face the future, and not to fear. Experts 
assure us that with the adoption of intensive methods of scien- 
tific cultivation the farmer can multiply the average yield of 
cotton by three; that of wheat can be doubled; the yield of 
corn, oats, rye, barley and potatoes may be easily increased by 
one-half. As for fruits and vegetables, the demand can always 
be met. Forestry experts are showing the safety that lies in 
scientific reforestation. There are latent resources in the 
farms that can and will be brought into play as fast as a popula- 
tion with a diminishing rate of increase requires. There are 
probably now ten thousand young men in agricultural colleges 
learning how to make those resources most effective. 

There is to be a new agriculture and a new farmer. The 



268 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

resistless power of self-interest will compel the revolution. 
Hitherto the conditions of farming have not encouraged enter- 
prise. When cheap land was plenty and its crops brought small 
returns, the farmer often worked for less than wages. Even 
on what were called the fairly prosperous farms, for a time 
the farmer got less than the worker in the modern factories, 
mills and offices. The first result, as we have already seen, 
was to drain from the farms the more active and ambitious 
workers. Those remaining were inevitably the more cautious, 
conservative or listless, and the typical farmer became a by- 
word to the dweller in cities. Those left on the farms were for 
the most part without vision or imagination. They were slow 
to spend money that promised no immediate return. So they 
made matters worse. 

The tide has turned. Investigation made for the " American 
Agriculturist " last December showed about 40,000 farms in 
Massachusetts, against 38,000 ten years ago. " Back to the 
land " is the cry of the hour. 

All this means that the farmer is coming into his own. The 
proof is to be found in the rise in the value of his property. 
Like other business men, he values his farm at a fair capital- 
ization of its earning power. As the rise of prices has made 
his farm earn more, he has raised its selling price; the rise 
in the selling price of land measures its increased earning 
power. 

George K. Holmes, of the Department of Agriculture, re- 
ports that he investigated the subject of prices of farm lands 
in every county in the United States in 1905, to discover the 
changes since the census of 1900. The investigation covered 
farms of a medium sort, and ascertained for them the price 
per acre, usually in actual sales, including improvements. The 
lowest rate of gain among the various classes of farms was 25.8 
per cent, for dairy farms; vegetable farms were next, with 26.7 
per cent. ; and fruit farms third, with 27.9 per cent. Farms 
without specialties gained 30.1 per cent. ; and farms devoted 
chiefly to tobacco, or rice, or sugar, or hay and grain, or live 
stock, had a gain ranging from 32.1 to 35.0 per cent. ; while 
cotton farms gained 48.2 per cent. The average for all farms 
was 33.5 per cent., — a gain of one-third in only five years. He 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 269 

declares it to be certain that the increase has continued since 
1905, with some interruption in 1908. Recent reports say that 
in central Illinois the price to-day is often half as much again 
as it was a year ago. Of course farmers are adjusting the 
prices of their products to the higher land values and costs. 
David Rankin, who farms 30,000 acres in Iowa and Missouri, 
points out that the fixed interest charges of the man who owns 
a farm have just about doubled. He used to figure that $3 
an acre would settle interest, taxes and the cost of keeping up 
the land, — the corn land. But now, with every acre of good 
corn land worth $100, the interest charges alone run up to 
$6 an acre, to say nothing of the increased taxes, the increased 
and increasing cost of labor, — more yet to the point, the in- 
creased cost of keeping up the fertility of the soil. It is not 
due to any accident or any combination that corn land is worth 
$100 an acre. The area of land that will produce corn is small 
compared to the world's need of corn. There is no way of 
increasing that area. But every increase in population makes 
just that much of an increase in demand for the products of 
corn lands. 

Herbert Myrick, of the Orange Judd publications, said to 
us: — 

You must remember that right here in Massachusetts and other parts 
of New England is the cheapest land, except in certain parts of the 
old south, that there is in America to-day. Ordinary farm land in 
Illinois runs from $125 to as high as $250 per acre. In Kansas, land 
is selling from $50 to $100 an acre, and that is the way over in 
northern and western Kansas. Now, you can buy New England land 
at $5, $15 and $25 per acre that will produce as many bushels of 
everything, and we can make beef right here in New England cheaper 
than they can in Illinois. 

Prof. W. P. Brooks of the Massachusetts Agricultural Col- 
lege has compiled for the commission tables throwing light on 
the recent course of Massachusetts agriculture, which may be 
found in Appendix I. 

Massachusetts fails to feed Itself. — According to the report 
of the United States Commissioner of Labor on the cost of liv- 
ing, 1903, the average amount of per capita expenditure on food, 
adults and children included, in 582 " normal " families in 



270 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Massachusetts was $75.12. For the purpose of that computa- 
tion, however, only families with 5 children or fewer were taken, 
and they averaged 3.96 persons, while the average of 25,440 
families of all sorts was 4.88. Such an average of food expendi- 
ture takes no account of the higher cost of living or of the 
comforts and luxuries of the well-to-do and the rich, much less 
of their waste and extravagance. Also, food prices have risen 
since 1903. On the other hand, food expenditure does not in- 
crease in proportion to the size of the family. 

From these considerations it seems probable that the average 
per capita food expenditure in Massachusetts is at least $100. 
The population of the State in 1910 is estimated by the 
Bureau of Statistics at 3,326,396. Therefore, an annual per 
capita food expenditure of $100 would mean a total of $332,- 
639,600 for the State. The total value of farm and food prod- 
uce of the State, according to the census of 1905, may be 
computed at $60,759,691. So by this method of estimate it 
would seem that two-elevenths of the total amount of food con- 
sumed within the State is produced within its borders. 

The value of some of the important foods that we produce 
may be computed as follows : — 



Foods. 


Estimate of 

Consumption 

per Family 

(U. S. Labor 

Bureau). 


Total Value of 

Production in 

Massachusetts 

(Census of 

1905). 


Total Value of 

Production 

per Family in 

Massachusetts, 

1905. 


Poultry, 


$12.83 


$1,811,665 


$2.74 


Eggs 


14.37 


3,840,506 


5.82 


Milk 


29.60 


20,443,189 


30.97 


Butter, 


32.28 


1,063,053 


1.61 


Cheese, 


2.71 


911,289 


1.38 


Potatoes 


11.22 


1,900,794 


2.88 


Other vegetables, 


9.50 


6,154,180 


9.32 


Fruit, berries, nuts, 


9.81 


4,357,552 


6.60 


Fish, 


19.57 


8,247,211 


12.50 



The estimates made by the Bureau of Labor were for work- 
ingmen's families, nearly all with incomes under $1,200 a year, 
and are doubtless very conservative; but it will be seen that 
the production of Massachusetts comes up to none of the esti- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 271 

mates except in the case of milk. Aside from this show- 
ing, it is an obvious fact that the farmers of the State, repre- 
senting less than 15 per cent, of the population, are not sup- 
plying the demands of the other 85 per cent, for even the 
perishable products for which the soil is adapted, and which 
otherwise must be imported, in the main, at great cost for 
transportation. Potatoes from Maine, apples from Oregon, 
poultry from Missouri, onions from Texas, small fruits and 
vegetables from Florida to Long Island appear in our markets 
in carload lots, and either blunt the edge of the market, make 
up the local shortage or undersell the local produce. 

Various reasons have been advanced for the failure of 
the Massachusetts farmer to enlarge the supply. There are 
many local causes, of course, but in general it is safe to say 
that the returns from the produce he has raised have been 
neither certain nor satisfactory. Soil and climate are not un- 
favorable ; land is not unreasonably high, — in many sections 
it is unreasonably low; capital is cheap; and locations, so far 
as social advantages, distance to market and adequacy of demand 
are concerned, are comparatively very favorable indeed. The 
deterrent causes lie in one or more of three directions ; high cost 
of production per unit; quantity possible to produce; or low 
net market price received for the product. 

It is not probable that economies in any or all of these direc- 
tions will succeed in reducing the cost of produce to the ulti- 
mate consumer. It may be possible, however, to give the 
consumer a better quality of product without increasing present 
prices. Such a result is worth striving for, and it is to the 
interest of the urban as well as of the rural community, to 
boards of trade, transportation companies, civic organizations 
and farmers' associations alike to encourage and assist every 
means for the improvement of agriculture. The welfare of city 
and country alike will be fostered by their co-operation to 
cheapen and enlarge production, and to improve the means for 
handling, transporting and distributing farm products. 

Food Animals. — Of food animals there were slaughtered in 
the slaughter-houses of Massachusetts in 1909, as reported by 
local boards of health to the State Board, about 2,300,000. In 
some cases the only figures available were for 1908, and estimate 



272 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

was necessary for 1909. In 1908 1,820,190 were slaughtered in 
Somerville, a material part for export. Dr. Ryder of the 
United States Bureau of Animal Industry is authority for 
the statement that of the hogs killed in Massachusetts under 
the supervision of the federal government not more than 1 per 
cent, are raised in this State, and of sheep the percentage is still 
smaller. In 1908 there were slaughtered under federal super- 
vision 58,865 cattle, 362,842 sheep, 1,699,083 hogs and 87,458 
calves, — a total of 2,208,248. 

It is impossible to reconcile these figures or draw satisfactory 
conclusions from them. If the proposed Bureau of Animal In- 
dustry should be created, one of its early tasks should be to 
ascertain the facts. The trouble now is that authority is so 
subdivided that even knowledge is impossible. To leave the 
charge of slaughtering to local boards of health will continue 
statistical uncertainty, as well as the more serious sanitary de- 
fects of the present system. 

All that can be inferred from the data now available is that 
we come very far from growing our own food animals. 

It appears that the number of swine and sheep slaughtered 
in Massachusetts under federal inspection fell of! materially in 
the first quarter of this year, as compared with the first quarter 
of 1909, but the number of calves increased from 11,346 to 
14,174. The April comparison will probably show a still larger 
increase, because of the importation of calves from the State 
of New York, many of them but a few days old. The New 
York law forbids these immature calves to be slaughtered for 
food, and permits their shipment only if it is alleged that they 
are to be raised. So they are ostensibly shipped to dairy farms, 
which too often are found in Massachusetts to exist only in the 
shape of a shipping tag. When the calves reach here, if they 
escape the slaughterhouse where federal inspection prevails, 
they get on the market in the shape of " bob veal," by reason 
of the laxity of a system that leaves State inspection to local 
boards of health. Humanity, sanitation and economics unite 
in calling for a change in this system. 

The economic waste comes from taking the calf from its 
mother before it has acquired weight enough to make its food 
use most advantageous to the communitv. The farmers aver 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 273 

that it is more profitable to sell the mother's milk than to let 
the calf grow on it. Very likely they would not take away the 
calf unless that gave them the more money, and in that case 
there might be no economic waste ; but, from the point of view 
of the public concern for meat food, the matter should be 
scientifically determined. 

With reference to swine, Prof. W. P. Brooks of the Massa- 
chusetts Agricultural College tells us : — 

The production of pork in the State might be greatly increased, and 
hogs might be grown and fattened chiefly on home-grown products. 
Pasture on such crops as clover, rape and possibly alfalfa would be 
important. Home-grown corn might be yet more important, while 
in many localities separator skim milk on dairy farms from which 
cream is sold would add an extremely valuable feed. Swill from our 
cities and towns would, if collected when fresh and judiciously fed, 
furnish a large amount of extremely wholesome and valuable food for 
swine. 

The practice throughout the State varies widely. Some 
cities sell their offal, getting material income ; others pay con- 
tractors to carry it away; others use it on their almshouse 
farms. Cambridge gets $13,010 a year from it; Somerville, 
$9,018 — including some paper; Pall Kiver, $8,990; Lowell, 
$5,926; Springfield, about $4,000; Salem, $2,651; Waltham, 
$2,400 ; Medford, $2,000 ; Maiden, $1,800. On the other hand, 
Newton pays about $6,000 a year for collecting " house garbage, 
etc." It is not clear, from replies to our letters of inquiry, 
whether offal and garbage are always discriminated. Worces- 
ter spent last year $37,737 for collection of " garbage/' which 
was fed to swine at the poor farm, with receipts of $29,257 
from the sale of pork ; net expense, $8,480. " Swill-fed swine," 
the reply says, " as kept in Worcester, command from % to 1 
cent a pound more than Chicago pork." In Holyoke, " kitchen 
refuse is removed under contract, the contractor using the 
greater part of it for feeding animals." Pitchburg pays for col- 
lecting garbage and offal; amount not stated. Haverhill pays 
$2,700 a year and the material collected, which is fed to swine. 

Boston paid last year $160,654 for the collection of offal — as 
distinct from garbage — and $47,755 for disposal of it, total 
$208,210, — for what elsewhere is a matter of municipal profit, 



274 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

as we have seen. That health considerations do not determine, 
would be inferred from the fact that the swill from certain 
parts of the city is knowingly used for feeding swine. There 
was a time when the city sold its offal for f>2% cents a cord foot. 
The chairman of the Melrose Board of Health writes to 
us: — 

It is the opinion of this board that the storing of garbage on the 
premises in open receptacles, giving free access to flies, which again 
have free access to food in the home, may be and frequently is a 
cause of disease. As a matter of fact, too, the collection of garbage 
is infrequent, and sometimes it becomes offensive. Unless the garbage 
is better stored or more frequently collected, it is comparatively of 
little moment whether it is subsequently fed to swine or destroyed. 
It is the opinion of this board, as a matter of economy, that garbage 
should not be destroyed and wasted, and that it can be fed to swine 
without unreasonable offence. 

Dirt is nothing but matter misplaced. Unless it contains the 
germs of disease, it is harmless. No evidence comes to our at- 
tention that swill as a food for swine would expose the public 
to serious danger. It has so been fed ever since swine were 
grown for food. A large proportion of the pork we now eat is 
swill-fed. It would seem a matter of public advantage and 
municipal economy for the city governments of Massachusetts 
to give attention to this source of waste of food material. In 
the smaller cities it is a comparatively small matter, but for a 
city like Boston it has become an important consideration. 

Sheep husbandry is a branch of our farming that has shown 
a steadily declining tendency. The operative causes have no 
doubt been prices not high enough to make it particularly re- 
munerative, and the ravages of dogs. Professor Brooks thinks 
that by suitable legislation to control dogs better the industry 
would be encouraged, but it would grow only if prices remained 
as high as at present, and probably not rapidly unless they 
should be yet higher. He fails to see how increasing sheep 
husbandry is likely to reduce the cost of living in the State. 
On the other hand, President Wood of the American Woolen 
Company is quoted as saying that New England is just as capa- 
ble of raising sheep as ever before, and can be as productive of 
wool as the United Kingdom, in proportion. Professor Car- 
ver, who has given study to the agricultural problem, said to us 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 275 

that rising prices would probably bring a revival of the sheep 
industry of New England. 

The yield of eggs for the whole United States shows an aver- 
age of only 61 to a hen for the year 1909 ; yet the hens of se- 
lected flocks will yield 100 to 200 eggs a year. The inference 
is warranted that improvement in some lines of agricultural 
production, at any rate, can be secured by skill without extra 
cost in running expenses. 

Hay and Other Crops. — Hay is the most valuable crop of 
Massachusetts. In 1905 the product of hay, straw and fodder 
was worth $13,891,406, and constituted 19 per cent, of the 
value of all the agricultural products of the State, — virtually 
one-fifth. The land used for hay showed an increase in acre- 
age in 1905 as against 1895 of 16.44 per cent., and an in- 
crease in value of 16.42 per cent., being appraised at an 
average of $58.42 an acre for the State. At the present time 
hay sells for a very high price, probably ranging from about 
$18 to $20 a ton at the farm in most parts of the State. This 
is the consequence of the exceptionally dry season which pre- 
vailed over a large part of the country last year. We have 
had two years of very short crops east of Buffalo. New York 
is a hay-producing State. This year it has shipped only a 
small proportion of what it usually ships. Maine has usually 
shipped many carloads of hay to this market, running into 
thousands. But for two years dealers have been shipping 
hay from Michigan to Maine, on account of the short crop. The 
price of hay in most parts of Massachusetts is affected by the 
product of all that part of our country as far west as the 
Mississippi valley and Canada; indeed, the local product of 
hay must meet the competition from even farther west, as baled 
alfalfa comes into our markets from Colorado. 

There are two general classes of food products handled in 
the retail markets of Massachusetts cities: products raised in 
the State, or very close to the ultimate market, — Massachu- 
setts local products ; and produce imported into the State from 
abroad and from other parts of the United States, — produce 
raised at some distance from the consumer's market, and 
shipped, either in its original form or somewhat modified, some 
distance before reaching the retailer. All food produce shipped 
in from a distance is subject to certain commercial disad- 



276 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



vantages, in the way of additional charges for transportation, 
insurance, loss by deterioration and waste, and special hand- 
ling charges which the same class of goods locally produced 
do not need to bear. Transportation charges on fruit from 
Oregon and California, for example, must be high. Fast 
schedules, iced and precooled cars and insurance are all added 
expenses of production, for which the consumer of fruit must 
pay. Local food products consist in a large measure of per- 
ishable commodities, — fruit, vegetables and dairy products, 
that reach the consumer in their raw state, and require rapid 
transportation, refrigeration and quick handling by the dis- 
tributors. Because of these requirements, other things being 
equal, the nearer the source of supply is to the market the 
greater the advantage. It is in these products that Massachu- 
setts should excel. 

Labor and the Farmer. — Labor is the biggest problem of 
the farmer to-day. In response to our request for information 
about its supply in Massachusetts, Walter L. Sears, super- 
intendent of the State Free Employment Office in Boston, 
writes as follows : — 

The business of this office, so far as it relates to the demand for 
farm labor, is with owners of small farms, who keep one or possibly 
two cows, a few hens, and raise only enough produce for their own 
table. Such owners rarely require the services of more than one 
man. His duties on such a farm are very general, — to milk, care 
for one or more horses, plow, plant, and cut wood. Sometimes the 
employer manages his own place, and assists to some extent in the 
work, and in such cases the pay is much smaller than if the employee 
were alone and working on his own initiative. Very little farming for 
profit is carried on around Boston, except the market gardening about 
Arlington. We have received very few orders for farm hands on 
farms conducted as a business solely for profit. The following table 
shows the facts relating to the work of this office since its opening, 
December 3, 1906, in the matter of farm labor : — 



Year. 



Supply. 



Demand. 



Positions 
filled. 



Average 
Pay (Per 
Month). 



1907, 
1908, 
1909, 
1910, 



1,366 
1,815 
1,676 



1,358 

768 
811 



847 



772 



$21.50 
17.53 
18.40 
19.57 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 277 

In 1908 our office had become better and more favorably known 
among farmers. The Springfield and Fall River offices were then 
open, and we lost the patronage of the farmer from the vicinity of 
those offices, especially from western Massachusetts, where more large 
farms are operated for profit and where higher wages are paid than 
in the vicinity of the Boston office. The figures for that same year 
show a decreased demand, a corresponding increase in supply and a 
lower average wage. The depression began in earnest, and passed 
into 1909. The farmer had little difficulty in securing farm hands, 
as thousands of men walked through the country seeking employment 
on the land, very many of whom in ordinary times would not have 
been willing to accept such employment. The wages were lower, there 
being a surplus supply. You will observe from the table that the 
supply and demand in 1907 were nearly equal; that we filled 62 per 
cent, of the demand for help. We also secured employment for 62 
per cent, of the applicants for work, at an average wage of $21.50 
a month, with room, board and washing. It may be said to have 
been a normal year. In 1908 the demand decreased 43 per cent., 
whereas the supply increased 32 per cent, and the average wage for 
the year decreased 18 per cent. In 1909 conditions began to improve. 
There was a noticeable increase in the demand and a corresponding 
decrease in the supply of labor. There was also an appreciable in- 
crease in the average wage, with a still further increase since November 
30 last. 

At Springfield, Chester W. Allen, superintendent of the 
State Free Employment Office, told us that the demand for farm 
help this year is very great, and the supply seems to be rather 
small. The price that the farmers are paying is practically 
$5 a month more than it was last year, being $25, with board 
and room, for a good man. Men are generally hired in that 
part of the country for eight months. 

Last year the supply seemed a great deal larger than this 
year. Asked if the farm laborer expects to work fewer hours 
than before, Mr. Allen replied : — 

I know many cases that have come under my observation where they 
get through at 6 o'clock, except in the haying season, when the farm 
helper expects to work a little later. Where there are any cows, they 
begin to milk shortly after 4 o'clock in the morning. It is about 
a 14-hour day, I guess, on any farm. We find very few complaints 
from the farmers this year, because we have not handled the fellow 
who comes along without any clothes, or anything like that. The 
farmers in this section of the country do not want them, — what you 
call the tramp. We do not have anything to do with them. A man 



278 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

was in the office to-day who employs a number of help. He has a 
foreman who boards the help, and he said he had to go up $2 a month 
on the board of these men in order to get them this year. He paid 
for board last year $18, so that now the laborer is getting virtually 
$45 a month on that farm. We fill, I should say, off-hand, probably 
800 or 900 places for farmers a year. It seems to me there ought 
to be a bureau in Worcester. It is near the center of the farming 
district. We here cover Berkshire County adequately, because a great 
many of the Berkshire County people go to New York State for their 
help. 

Ex-Representative Frederick L. Fisher of Norwood, dairy 
farmer, told us that he estimated the increased cost of farm 
labor in hours and prices at 50 per cent. His men work about 
11 hours in 13. Ten years ago the men got into the barn by at 
least 4.30, and did not get out of it before 7. Day labor worked 
10 hours then, against 9 now. 

In its bearing on food prices, the cost of farm labor through- 
out the country is just as important to us as its cost in Massa- 
chusetts, as we buy so much of our food elsewhere. An Oneida 
farmer recently wrote to the ]STew York " Tribune " : — 

There is a great scarcity of farm laborers all over the country. The 
farms in the State of New York could easily produce double the 
present yield if enough competent help could be secured to do the neces- 
sary work for any reasonable price. 

An Illinois farmer wrote : — 

As a matter of fact, even with improved conditions on the farm 
it is most difficult to get people to stay there. The scarcity of labor 
is the despair of the farmer to-day. We pay 40 per cent, higher 
wages than we paid ten years ago, and we can hardly get men enough 
at any price to run a farm as it should be done. 

These are typical reports, and indicate the state of affairs 
everywhere. 

Farms and the Foreigner. — In 1900 the farms of Massa- 
chusetts were still for the most part in native hands. Of 37,556 
persons engaged in agriculture, including care of animals, 
72.64 per cent, were of native birth and native descent; 6.35 
per cent, of native birth and foreign descent; .71 per cent. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 279 

foreign born; 11.56 per cent, foreign born, naturalized; and 
8.74 per cent, alien. Combining these percentages, we find the 
native born represented 78.99 per cent, and the foreign born 
21.01 per cent. ; or, in other words, nearly four-fifths of the 
persons engaged in agriculture were of native birth. Agricul- 
tural laborers were not included in those figures, but were classi- 
fied separately. Of 33,912 of them, 16,653, or 49.10 per cent., 
were native born of native descent; 4,613, or 13.60 per cent., 
native born of foreign descent; 1,925, or 5.68 per cent., foreign 
born; 2,583, or 7.62 per cent., foreign born naturalized; and 
8,138, or 24 per cent., alien. Combining these percentages, we 
find that 62.70 per cent, were of native birth and 37.30 per 
cent, of foreign birth. 

The figures for 1905 have not yet been published. It is 
probable they will show an increase of the foreign born on the 
farm. To them are we most likely to look for the labor help 
so much needed. Max Mitchell has pointed out the importance 
of applying system to this matter. He has well said : — 

Our problem does not confine itself to surplus immigration, but is 
rather one of uneven distribution. Let us send the newcomers to 
localities where they are needed, thus deriving benefit from immigra- 
tion, and making the immigrants happy and useful citizens. What 
has been our course up to the present time? We have allowed the 
question of immigrant regulation to take care of itself. The results 
have not been satisfactory. Too many have settled in large cities, 
creating congested districts, letting the golden opportunity of culti- 
vating our lands slip by. It is necessary to pursue our work from 
the time the immigrant first sets foot upon our shores. If advised, 
and made to understand the opportunities existing beyond the crowded 
cities, the immigrants could be induced to go to places where they 
are needed. There would then be no cause for alarm. To-day, without 
any effort on our part, a great many have left the large cities and 
have settled in the interior of the country. Their friends have fol- 
lowed, thus creating a nucleus for others. The tendency of the immi- 
grant to-day is to get away from the large cities. Only tell him where 
there is an opportunity, and if he has the means he will go. The 
time to influence the immigrant is when he leaves the steamer. What 
you can do with the immigrant at the port and time of landing you 
never will be able to do again. A great many come to friends. They 
may not be induced to change the course of their destination, but 
those who have no relatives will follow the advice given them, and 
will settle in places where they are really needed. 



280 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

We recommend to the Legislature consideration of the feasi- 
bility of extending the function of the free employment office 
in this direction, to the end that our farms may be more easily 
and plentifully supplied with labor. 

Expert Views as to tuhat can be done. — As to methods in 
which it may be possible to do something to increase the agri- 
cultural products of the State, Prof. W. P. Brooks of the Massa- 
chusetts Agricultural College, in a report prepared for this 
commission, offers the following suggestions : — 

I believe that increase of agricultural products under existing con- 
ditions cannot be expected in most places to reduce the cost of living". 
The prices must remain, I believe, at least as high as at present, and 
no great increase in the sum total of our products in most directions 
can be expected unless the cost of production can be reduced. There 
are certain important factors which would have a tendency to reduce 
the cost of production. Among these, some of the more important 
are: — 

1. Wider diffusion of knowledge of things agricultural. This would 
lead to the adoption of better methods. 

2. Cheaper and more accessible capital, which would make it pos- 
sible for farmers to hire at reasonable rates of interest money needed 
to develop their farms and carry on their business. 

3. In some cases co-operation in buying and selling would help 
lower the cost of production. In the case of cranberries we already 
have co-operative selling to a considerable extent. The grange is 
doing something in the direction of co-operative buying. We need 
much greater development in the direction both of co-operative buying 
and co-operative selling. 

4. We vitally need greater confidence in the possibilities of agri- 
culture, more enthusiasm and enterprise. Something should be done 
to foster confidence and enthusiasm, and to stimulate enterprise by 
diffusion of knowledge; but demonstrated possibilities are much more 
important. Let a single person, even, in a community make a success 
in any line adapted to the local conditions, and he will have a host 
of imitators. 

The extension of an improved agriculture into the hill towns would, 
in my judgment, in the case of most products afford very little lower- 
ing in the general prices to consumers. Such towns are unfavorably 
located for competition in most lines of production; costs are higher 
than in the more favorable locations now occupied. In such com- 
munities the local product will be locally important. It may perhaps 
somewhat reduce the cost of living locally, but cannot affect the cost 
to the consumer in the cities and large towns. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 281 

Dr. Alexander E. Cance of the Massachusetts Agricultural 
College thus discusses the opportunities of agriculture in a 
report to this commission : — 

From the economic point of view there are three suggestions to be 
made: specialization of products by localities; the co-operative em- 
ployment of labor and costly equipment; and the co-operative collec- 
tion and shipment of produce to the final market in as large consignment 
as possible. Even the most cursory study of closely related manu- 
facturing industries — of fruit-growing in the west, berry-raising on 
the Atlantic coast, trucking in the south, or specialized agricultural 
industries at a hundred points in the United States — shows invariably 
that the best results have followed when in a given community every 
farmer has raised the same principal crop. Practical skill is devel- 
oped, and healthful rivalry; faulty methods are more readily seen 
and eliminated; best of all, a better quality of product results, and 
a steady and standard supply is assured the market. 

The fact that any industry is localized in a more or less limited 
area makes possible the organization of a labor force sufficiently large 
to be secured readily, used economically and efficiently and paid 
liberally. The sugar-beet growers would have frizzled out long ago, 
on account of insufficient labor, had they not hit upon the idea of 
gangs of laborers, who work by the acre and move from farm to farm, 
hoeing, weeding, pulling, topping and preparing the beets for market. 
The individual grower is relieved of the necessity of keeping one or 
two additional men all the season, or of vainly endeavoring to secure 
a gang for periods of a few days at intermittent intervals during the 
summer. Co-operative employment of laborers is possible in many 
segregated agricultural industries, and will relieve very greatly the 
anxiety in regard to the labor supply. 

The problem of labor-saving equipment and machinery, too expensive 
for the individual farmer, has been solved in many communities by the 
co-operative purchase of such implements by a few farmers; perhaps 
more often one individual buys a machine and operates it at a piece 
rate on several farms in the community, after the manner of the 
threshing machine, corn shredder or corn harvester in the west, spray- 
ing machines in certain fruit districts and potato diggers in others. 
In certain sections of a western State the whole aspect of agriculture 
was changed from depression and loss to hopefulness and prosperity 
by the introduction of co-operative machinery and specialization of 
product. 

A third method, and a very immediate and easily possible method of 
cheapening production and bringing about much that is desirable to 
the consumer, is the co-operative, farm-to-farm collection and shipment 
of produce. There are many reasons for the increased cost of pro- 



282 COST OF LIVING. [May. 

ducing milk; one that is rarely mentioned is the cost of delivering 
from the farm to the railroad station. In many places in Massachusetts 
small producers come into the depot morning after morning, from 
2 to 6 miles, to deliver 25 to 100 quarts of milk, worth from 75 cents 
to $3.50, at an expense of 10 to 60 per cent, of the value of the milk. 
In a number of places personal investigation has shown that the co- 
operative collection of milk, as well as of other produce shipped in 
small quantities, would greatly reduce the cost of producing, and make 
the difference between profit and loss in numerous individual instances. 
Daily co-operative collection and shipment of eggs from some com- 
munities assures the city buyer a dependable supply of fresh eggs, 
the customer possibly a better quality, and the farmer increased 
returns. 

The success of the farmer is said to depend on an aggregate of small 
profits. It may with as much truth be said that his profits are de- 
pendent on the aggregate of small savings. That very great savings 
may be effected in the delivery of produce to the local market has been 
demonstrated again and again. Wheat is easily transported, and is 
hauled in full wagon loads; yet it costs 29 per cent, more on the 
average to haul a ton of wheat from the farm to the nearest shipping 
point than to ship it from New York to Liverpool. The comparative 
ton-mile cost of hauling small loads of vegetables, fruit or milk to 
the shipping station is much greater. 

Geographical specialization of agricultural production is almost 
fundamental if there are to be car-lot shipment, standard qualities of 
products, uniform packages, guaranteed goods and a dependable sup- 
ply. There is no question about the possible economy of these things 
both to the producer and to the consumer. Butter furnishes a standing 
illustration of the getting together of producers in communities of 
limited area to produce a standard, marketable grade of product, uni- 
form in every respect. The buyer of the " country butter " of a few 
decades back, of every strength, color and degree of rancidity, appre- 
ciates the change that a single generation of co-operative factory pro- 
duction and community marketing has accomplished; the same 
development has come about in long-distance fruit and berry ship- 
ments. There seems no reason why other perishable products should 
not be handled more efficiently, uniformly and economically in large 
quantities from contiguous sources of supply. 



C. PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION. 

In analyzing the costs of an article, it is customary to divide 
them into those of (a) production and (b) distribution. 

Production may be of articles that go from the farm to the 
consumer without change, or of those that are altered in their 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 283 

course by manufacture. We have already discussed the produc- 
tion of food and the raw materials of manufacture in the treat- 
ment of agriculture and various food topics. Likewise, the con- 
ditions of manufacture most closely concerning the subject of 
our inquiry have been treated under various headings. Here 
may be added some general considerations. 

An investigation reported by the Bureau of Statistics of 
Labor in 1890 made instructive disclosures regarding net profits 
in the manufacturing industries of Massachusetts. There is no 
reason to believe that conditions have changed enough in twenty 
years to make the findings of the Bureau inapplicable to the 
present situation. 

In the returns of this investigation 10,013 establishments 
were represented, covering three-quarters of the capital invested 
in all establishments of all industries in the State, and believed 
to produce nearly 70 per cent, of its product. It was found 
that each $100 of the selling price of the products of these 
industries included the following elements : — 

Stock or materials, $58.91 

Salaries, 1.73 

Wages, 22.34 

Kent, 73 

Taxes, 56 

Insurance, .33 

Freight, 1.27 

New equipment, .24 

Repairs, .81 

Other expenses, .13 

Gross profit, 12.95 

$100.00 
The gross profits were thus divided : — 

Interest, $2.15 

Depreciation on machinery, etc., 1.90 

Selling expenses and bad debts, 5.00 

Net profit, 3.90 

$12.95 

The net profit of $3.90 of each $100 of selling price was 
found to be equivalent to 4.83 per cent, on the amount of capi- 
tal invested. 



284 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

The results of the investigation seemed to Horace GL Wadlin, 
then Chief of the Bureau, " to warrant the inference that ma- 
terial improvement in the workingman's condition is not to be 
expected from an increase of his money wages gained by add- 
ing thereto a portion of the profits now absorbed by capital.' ' 
He concluded the report with this paragraph, most pertinent 
to our inquiry : — 

Where are we then to look for the margin between cost of production 
and the price to the consumer? If neither the workingman nor his 
employer is profiting unduly by the present system, may it not be 
possible that the middleman, or the distributor of wealth in its various 
forms, may be securing more than his rightful share, and is thus bear- 
ing down upon the two extremes between which he is placed? Are not 
the creators and consumers of wealth suffering in common from the 
exactions of the distributors of wealth? This question cannot be 
answered from data now at hand, but it is evident that the mechanism 
of distribution, as well as the mechanism of production, must be 
brought to the statistical basis before the final solution of the question 
of profits will be secured. 

Since then some data have been amassed to which we hope to 
add. First, however, the transporter should be considered. 

1. Transportation. 

Nobody appears to try seriously to lay the blame for high 
prices at the door of the railroads. As a matter of fact, they 
are among the greatest sufferers ; they are getting less for what 
they give than ever before in their history. 

Measured in money, their transportation charges are a little 
above the lowest point ever reached; there had been no rise 
of importance at the time for which the latest statistics are 
available, and the Secretary of the Interstate Commerce Com- 
mission informed a member of this commission that he did not 
think there had been recent increase. The average revenue from 
freight for all the railroads of the country, in cents per ton per 
mile, in the five-year period 1881-85, was 1.128; 1886-90, 
.969; 1891-95, .874; 1896-1900, .762; 1901-05, .763. For 
1906 the figure was .748 ; for 1907, .759. The average freight 
rate for Massachusetts roads in the corresponding periods 
ran: 1.664; 1.552; 1.356; 1.23; 1.216. For 1906 it was 1.23; 
1907, 1.19; 1908, 1.17; and 1909, 1.19. 

Taking the country through, passenger receipts per passen- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 285 

ger per mile dropped from 2.42 in 1883 to 1.973 in 1898, ris- 
ing to 2.014 in 1907. Average passenger rates have been 
virtually stationary since 1894. In Massachusetts the drop 
was nearly steady from 2.05 in 1880 to 1.63 in 1908 and 1.64 
in 1909. 

In the five-year period 1884-88, the average cost of carrying 
a bushel of wheat from Chicago to New York by rail was 16.32 
cents; 1904-08, 10.54 cents; in 1908, 10.60 cents. 

Meanwhile, the cost of operation has closely followed the 
course of general prices. The average cost of running a train 
one mile fell from $0.96 in 1890 to $0,929 in 1897, and since 
then has shown an increase in every year, reaching $1,469 in 
1907. 

The operating expenses of Massachusetts railroads have in- 
creased from $0,939 per train mile in 1901 to $1,185 in 1908 
and $1,138 in 1909. 

About 70 cents of every dollar taken in by Massachusetts 
railroads is paid out in operating expenses, — for wages, fuel, 
repairs, cars, locomotives, etc. Nearly everything paid for or 
bought by a railroad has risen in price. The maximum price 
of locomotives has gone up in a dozen years from about $12,000 
to about $20,000 ; the price of freight cars from $700 or $750 
to well above $1,000. Fortunately, these increases have in part 
been offset by greater efficiency and capacity of equipment. 
Wages rose by about 24 per cent, from 1897 to 1909. 

Nevertheless, the railroads have prospered. The gains by 
the general stopping of rebates and free passes, with the 
enormous increases in volume of business, made it possible 
for the roads to stand the strain of a period in which average 
expense grew as average income fell. 

The outlook, however, is not cheerful for either the railroads 
or the public. Already our Massachusetts roads are beginning 
to raise rates, and they must advance them further if prices keep 
on rising. The predicament of the railroads comes from the 
difficulty in raising rates and fares without a storm of public 
protest. Accustomed now to the 2-cents-a-mile rate, passengers 
will not readily accept increases. With freight rates the 
advances can be made more easily through changes in classifi- 
cation, so that the general public will not notice them. 



286 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

The street railroads are in a still worse dilemma. Their 
income is wholly from passenger fares, and a change is instantly 
known by all patrons. Custom has firmly fixed 5 cents in the 
Massachusetts mind as the proper amount to pay for riding on 
a street car. With the purchasing power of a nickel dropping 
every year, it is hard to see how the street railroads can long 
maintain the customary rate. 

As a factor in the cost of living, transportation is of great 
importance. In 1907 the railroads of the country averaged to 
receive from every inhabitant $30.87, or $154.35 from each 
family, assuming the average family to consist of five persons. 
But it is instructive to note how small are the items of 
these payments, both in themselves and relatively. This the 
commission is enabled to do through the courtesy of Vice-Presi- 
dent T. E. Byrnes of the New York, New Haven & Hartford 
Railroad, who informs us that an investigation two years ago 
showed that the price paid by the Boston housekeeper for a 
dozen eggs during the season of shipment seldom exceeds by 
more than 5 cents the price received by the western farmer 
who takes them to the country store. The railroads bring eggs 
1,000 miles to Boston for 1% cents a dozen, and 2,000 miles 
or so for about 2% cents, as payment for handling. 

The railroad gets only about 1 cent a pound for bringing 
butter from the Mississippi River to Boston, while the dealer 
averages about 1% cents for selling. Turkeys are brought 
from Texas to -Boston for 1% cents a pound, chickens from 
Chicago for about % of a cent a pound; and at this rate the 
railroads bring them in a refrigerator car, keeping them iced 
while in transit. Grain and grain products are brought from 
Chicago for about 17% cents a hundred. Hay is brought from 
the Ohio valley for about $3 a ton and from the Mississippi 
valley for $5 a ton. Beef is brought from Chicago to Boston 
for 45 cents per 100 pounds. Products of the beef or hog 
are carried from western packing houses to New England at 
rates varying from % of a cent to 1 cent a pound. For carry- 
ing wheat to make a barrel of flour from the western farmer 
to the Minneapolis mills, and for carrying the flour from 
Minneapolis to Boston, the railroads average to receive 85 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 287 

cents. On potatoes, the freight rate for a barrel containing 
about 2y 2 bushels from Florida is $1.05 ; South Carolina, 65 
cents; North Carolina, 45 cents; Virginia, 30 cents; scaling 
down to 5 or 6 cents a bushel from near-by points. Melons are 
brought from the Carolinas for 1 cent and from California 
for 21/2 cents each. The transportation charge on the material 
entering a pair of shoes made in a St. Louis factory averages 
l!/4 cents. To carry the same pair of shoes to any part of the 
United States averages to cost between 2 and 3 cents. In 
Boston it has been estimated that the transportation charge on 
a man's suit of clothes is from 2 to 8 cents; on calicoes and 
ginghams from % 5 to % of a cent a yard. The freight charges 
paid on the entire apparel of a fully dressed man or woman 
in this section would range perhaps from 6 or 7 cents to 16 
or 18 cents. The rates on woolen goods from any of the New 
England mills are so low that a yard of cloth which will sell 
from $1.50 upwards in any of the western markets will not 
have paid the railroads more than 5 cents from the sheep's back 
in Colorado to Massachusetts and back again to the Mississippi 
River. The transportation charge on raw cotton to the mills in 
Massachusetts will average from % to % of a cent a pound 
when brought from far away plantations in Texas. The rate 
on tanned leather between Chicago and Boston is 39 cents per 
100 pounds. 

Insignificant as are many of these items in themselves, we 
have seen that their aggregate becomes of vital importance. To 
it is to be added the cost of local transportation. In 1909 the 
street railways of this State took an average of $9.80 from 
each inhabitant, or $49 from each family; therefore, the aver- 
age Massachusetts family pays more than $200 a year for the 
transportation of the persons composing it, and their supplies. 
That there should have been no appreciable increase in the prices 
charged to them for this transportation in the last ten or fifteen 
years, makes the rise in the other factors of the cost of living 
all the more conspicuous. 

Whether or not, in spite of this situation, the railroads are 
still charging too much and making profits too large, would take 
the most expert investigation to determine. On the whole, their 



288 COST OF LIVING. [May 

managers are giving an adequate service at what does not on 
the face appear to be an excessive price, and certainly at a 
price that has not risen as have other prices. 

Possible Improvements. — The railroads have not, however, 
reached the limit of their power to help lessen the cost of living. 
They could give certain services that would be a distinct ad- 
vantage in this direction. For example, no one who has com- 
pared the wonderfully efficient and expensive Chamber of 
Commerce plants ; storage elevators ; automatic mechanism 
for facility of handling, loading and unloading; the specially 
built docks, floating warehouses and the like, costing millions 
of dollars to build and more to operate, for the handling 
of staple, storable products like wheat and cotton, meat 
and certain dairy products — with the meager, cheap, inade- 
quate, wasteful and frequently unsanitary facilities and struc- 
tures provided for the unloading, storage and distribution of 
perishable products, can help wondering what the result would 
be were the conditions reversed. Capitalists have been slow to 
put money into distributing and storage warehouses for perish- 
ables; but recently scientific methods of preservation and re- 
frigeration have been reduced to a practical, commercial basis, 
and buildings for long-time storage are now assured wherever 
there is a demand for them. There are lacking in most of our 
cities receiving depots, adequate storage rooms for the protec- 
tion and preservation of produce for a few hours, facilities for 
holding over without excessive deterioration surplus produce 
from one day to the next, cold-storage rooms for rent, and 
farmers' markets. Provision for all of these should be made 
or encouraged by the railroads. They are, to be sure, usually 
willing to help in promoting these enterprises, as a matter of 
pure business policy, but they ought to take a more active part. 

The terminal facilities of the Pennsylvania lines at Pittsburg 
for the reception of fruits, vegetables, milk and other perish- 
able produce are models of their kind, and are an excellent ex- 
ample of railway enterprise. Large yards, with trackage and 
facilities for holding and handling several hundred cars, are 
provided. The yards are divided into sections, aud each sec- 
tion is devoted exclusively to one particular product. Cars of 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 289 

this product, berries, for example, are run into their particular 
sheds, and commission men and produce buyers are afforded 
every facility for getting their produce quickly on the market. 
Producers whose agents are in the city may ship in car lots, and 
large buyers will come directly to the yards to receive the prod- 
uce. The sections are systematically arranged; the receiving 
agent of the railroad knows just how many cars each will hold, 
and when one section is well filled, and the prospects show too 
much of the same produce on the way, he wires consigning 
agents and deflects the surplus to other markets. In this way 
glutted markets and losses from a slump in prices are fore- 
stalled, and a fairly steady, reasonable market is made more 
certain. By vigilance and prompt action in shunting and re- 
routing shipments, the railroad agent frequently determines 
the market of certain food stuffs. It is to the road's interest to 
see that the grower gets satisfactory returns, and the consumer 
in Pittsburg a steady, adequate supply of fresh fruit and vege- 
tables in good condition. Fairly adequate facilities for caring 
for surplus stock carried over from night to morning are pro- 
vided, but the purpose is to control the supply so that there will 
be a clean market every morning. 

Some such provision by the railroads in all the large cities 
would prevent the disastrous gluts and ruinous prices that make 
many shipments in some seasons a total loss, work havoc with 
the small growers, cause the waste and destruction of hundreds 
of carloads of produce thrown out on the garbage dump, and 
confer no benefits on the consumer, either immediately or in the 
long run. Produce dealers and commission men know well 
that an uncontrolled supply is not only a great source of waste 
produce, but also the cause of much annoyance and ill-feeling, 
— a detriment to the producer and a discredit to the commis- 
sion house. Kailroads can to a great degree prevent overstock- 
ing. Pew growers wish to ship to a glutted market ; nearly all 
are willing to allow the railroad's agent to use his judgment in 
routeing, when a prospective oversupply appears imminent. 

Enough trackage, covered sheds for protection from sun and 
heat, easy access for hucksters', grocers' and wholesalers' wag- 
ons, provision for quick unloading and transfer to the clistrib- 



290 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

uting wagons, and a wide-awake produce agent, will cut down 
wastes and losses enormously and make possible cheaper and 
fresher produce. 

Let any person pay a visit to the receiving yards and the 
markets in almost any of our large cities, and the need for im- 
provement will be evident to him at once. Let him spend a 
few days and make some inquiries, and the revelation of waste 
and loss will amaze him. It is bad enough to see produce, rep- 
resenting the outlay of much labor and capital expense, thrown 
out by the carload, but when it is known that freight and han- 
dling charges have been paid to transport this worthless produce 
to the city market, the waste appears nothing short of ruinous. 
These are producers' losses, and many of them are due to care- 
lessness or ignorance in packing, sorting, grading and preparing 
products for market. Many, however, are due to the lack of 
proper sheds, warehouses and terminals. 

Direct Shipments. — The railroads might usefully encour- 
age direct shipments from producer to final retailer or consumer. 
An interesting instance of the value of work along this line is 
given by the case of the Louisiana rice growers, who are handi- 
capped by the limited market for rice in the United States. A 
canvass for the causes of the low consumption of rice has led 
them to the conclusion that the high retail price of rice — from 
10 to 15 cents a pound in northern retail markets — is one great 
deterrent to wider demand. Growers and rice-milling associa- 
tions declare that the best rice should retail at a fair profit for 
less than ^ve cents a pound ; and one company, representing the 
rice producers of Crowley, La., offers to ship 100-pound bags of 
rice to any consumer, laid down at his railway station, any- 
where in the United States, for $3 to $1, according to the 
quality of the rice, saving the customer all of the middleman's 
charges, which in this case amount to from 150 to 275 per cent, 
above the price for which it is laid down in the consumer's 
freight depot. 

The first obstacle in the way of small shipments direct to 
the consumer is the inadequate provision for such service at 
d. reasonable rate. For perishable products in small quantities, 
shipment by express is the only feasible means. Express rates 
are indefensible. Small shipments of eggs, crates of berries, 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 291 

hampers of vegetables, a few pounds of dressed poultry, would 
be possible in thousands of instances at a good profit to the 
small farmer and at big saving to the city household in the 
course of the year, were express charges within the bounds of 
reasonable compensation for service rendered. As it is, ex- 
press shipments, except of very choice products, add substan- 
tially to the consumers' price, and reduce to a minimum the 
possibility of competition between the small or distant producers 
and the large shipper or the grower who delivers his own prod- 
uce. However, relief from exorbitant express rates does not 
seem to be possible of immediate and direct realization. 

It is possible that some reduction can be made in short-haul 
freight rates for " less than carload " lots. A good many com- 
plaints concerning the 1. c. 1. rates on many commodities have 
been adjudicated and the charges adjusted. No doubt many 
are still unsatisfactory when compared with long-distance rates 
on carload or trainload lots, but more is to be hoped for from 
the organization of shippers' associations to handle the produce 
of a whole locality in large lots than in natural reductions in 
tariff. The New Jersey berry growers, many of them producing 
only 10 or 12 crates of berries daily in season, have found it 
advantageous to get together for the shipment of iced cars of 
berries to Pittsburg, Buffalo and Boston. They can lay them 
down in Boston not only more cheaply but also in better con- 
dition, and with some degree of confidence that the commission 
men will give them a square deal. Some shipments, too, are 
made directly to the large retailers, whose agents find it to 
their advantage to get on the ground and contract for the berries 
in quantities before the association has picked and crated them. 
The associations for the sale of berries or other produce always 
get a rebate of 3 per cent, of the selling price of the produce, 
making the commission charges 7 per cent., instead of the usual 
10 per cent. Two of the 3 per cent, rebated is ordinarily net 
gain, and is generally returned to the growers, 1 per cent, 
being used for the expenses of the association. One small 
Italian organization received $4,000 and more in rebates on 
strawberries alone, shipped from one small station in the berry 
district. 

Trolley Freight Service. — The most conspicuous opportu- 



292 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

nity in Massachusetts for public benefit from improvement in 
transportation facilities lies in the direction of using electric 
roads for the carrying of light freight. In certain localities 
in other States, where the trolley lines radiate from the prin- 
cipal marketing city like spokes from the hub of a wheel, and 
carry local freight at reasonable rates, the vegetable, poultry, 
dressed meat and dairy industries have been greatly stimu- 
lated. Large number of farmers raise small quantities of these 
incidental products, and deliver them by trolley directly to the 
retail grocer or the householder. Milk can be loaded on the car 
as it passes the farmer's gate each morning, at a minimum ex- 
pense, and delivered promptly at the city milk depot. Per- 
haps there are few cities that enjoy better or cheaper farm 
products than some of these trolley-fed cities in Pennsylvania 
and Ohio, and few are surrounded by more prosperous rural 
communities. The matter of trolley freight service, bringing 
reasonable charges and house-to-house collection of produce, 
is of vital interest both to city consumers and to farmers. Many 
of the Massachusetts cities, situated in a veritable net of 
radiating trolley lines that run through good general farming 
sections, might gather in great quantities of local produce, 
fresh every morning, whereas they must now depend on distant 
producers, who must ship through a line of commission men. 
Hundreds of farmers who will not or do not find it profitable 
to haul a crate of berries daily to the railway station for express 
shipments will load the same crate on the morning freight 
trolley, directed to grocer or city customer. 

The family hamper of miscellaneous vegetables, packed by 
the grower and shipped directly to the consumer or group of 
consumers, which is proving so satisfactory to a select retail 
trade, might be extended to include a much larger range of 
households, were the cost of rapid and trustworthy transporta- 
tion reduced. 

The seventh volume of the report of the United States In- 
dustrial Commission, devoted to the " Distribution of Farm 
Products," was prepared by John Franklin Crowell, Ph.D. 
His conclusions may thus be abbreviated : — 

The American system of distributing farm products is essentially a 
speculative system from beginning to end. The risks of distribution 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 293 

are shifted by both producers and consumers upon the distinct class 
of speculators known as distributors, who make it a business to take 
such risks and to divide up among themselves upon the basis of net 
profit on capital and cost of business capacity. It may be true of such 
a system that at any one time there are altogether too many men and 
too much machinery in it to operate it economically. In the distribu- 
tion of live stock, cotton, grain, tobacco and wool, the main tendency 
is to eliminate the more expensive middleman. On the other hand, 
products such as fruit and vegetables, where no storable visible supply 
exists, because of their perishable nature, have shown but a very slow 
tendency to get rid of the more expensive methods of distribution. 
Nothing but consolidation can economize costs of distribution. Owing 
to the absence of this factor, the most unfavorably marketed products 
are fruits and vegetables. The probability is that the entire business 
of selling on commission is antiquated, and should have been abandoned 
long ago. Co-operative methods have not yet fully proved themselves 
available as substitute methods, though the Californian systems of mar- 
keting crops of deciduous and citrous fruits is a successful development 
in the right direction. 

2. JOBBERS* AND RETAILERS' PROFITS. 

Testimony regarding the profits of jobbers was given at the 
hearings by various witnesses. L. E. Griffin of the firm of 
P. G. Gray & Co., provision brokers and commission merchants, 
said: — 

The percentage on which we do business has decreased; that is, four- 
teen or fifteen years ago, when we started in our commission business, 
it was a frequent occurrence for us to get 2V2 per cent, for selling 
beef and pork products, where to-day our commission runs from % 
to 1 per cent. 

The Boston agents of the Chicago packing houses sell their 
meats on a commission basis of 40 cents per 100 pounds. P. L. 
Hughes of the Cudahy Packing Company said : — 

That is the cost to the packer for selling at this end, maintaining a 
selling agency or a branch house. 

President Rothwell of the Chamber of Commerce and of the 
Bay State Milling Company told us that in the case of flour 
the tendency is toward the elimination of the jobber. 

The percentage of the flour being jobbed to-day varies in different 
sections of the country, but I should say that in Boston at least 50 
per cent, is still jobbed. To-day the petty retailer does not have more 



294 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

than 5 or 10 barrels of flour, but he will have as many brands as he 
has barrels, simply to suit the whim of the customer who comes in. 
He is a man who does not try to sell what he finds to be best; he 
is no longer an expert, — does not pretend to be. Customers come 
in and ask for the thing they see advertised, and he passes it out 
without a word. I should say the profits of the jobber were stationary; 
there is no increase in them, certainly. The cost of doing the business 
has increased, for the reason that it costs as much to deliver 1 barrel 
as it does 5 or 10. A jobber's profit on a barrel of flour, speaking in 
gross percentages, is 8 per cent. 

Of shoe jobbing we were told by Charles H. Jones of the 
Commonwealth Shoe and Leather Company : — 

The conditions in the trade are such that the cost of the shoe at 
the factory is immediately reflected in the price to the retail consumer; 
the business is so strongly competitive. Take the situation as it is 
at the present time. When our samples were made, the men went on 
the road six weeks ago, and it looked as if the price of leather would 
be fully maintained and go even higher. Following that there has been 
a slight softening in the market. The moment we can see any tendency 
to a reduction of price we immediately notify our men on the road to 
make a reduction, in order that our competitors shall not take advan- 
tage of us. There are at least twenty large manufacturing companies 
making exactly the same class of goods that we make, and there are 
always men on the road with samples, just as ours are. Any time they 
see any possible advantage to be taken of us they take it, to get our 
business, and we do the same; so that any change in the cost of ma- 
terial is reflected immediately in the price on the road. The actual 
selling expense, I believe, in the factories where the business is con- 
ducted most economically, on an unadvertised shoe, costing $2.30 at 
the factory, will be 20 cents a pair. 

That the increase in prices of staple commodities charged by 
the retailer can be traced to a wide variety of causes, many of 
them trifling in themselves, bnt counting heavily in the aggre- 
gate, is evident from the explanations made by dealers through- 
out the State. To get at the reasons for the marked advance in 
the past decade, we not only made inquiry of witnesses, but also 
addressed inquiries to retail dealers in different lines of provi- 
sions, as well as those selling clothing, dry goods and shoes, 
giving them a chance to explain the charge, made frequently, 
that the advance of the cost of living has been due in consid- 
erable part to increase in the profits of the retailers, and that 
their prices are by far too much in excess of the wholesale price. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 295 

The aim was to get at the difference in prices in the smaller 
towns as well as in the larger centers, for, while the margins 
of increase in the former might not be great, they would per- 
haps show changes less influenced by foreign causes than would 
those in the cities. It is evident that in the smaller places the 
dealer is content with smaller profits, while of course his ex- 
penses are far less in every way, and show less fluctuation. 

The gross profits — the difference between the wholesale and 
the retail price — show no surprising range in percentages. 
Only one dealer reports them as high as 40 per cent., the min- 
imum is 15 per cent., three-fifths are between 20 and 30 per cent, 
and the average is 22.85 per cent., — a figure not based on suffi- 
cient information to warrant one in accepting it as exact. Gross 
profits as reported are greater in the shops dealing in apparel 
than in those handling groceries and provisions. This is ex- 
plained by the greater cost to the apparel dealer of rent, wages, 
advertising, capital investment and general style of doing busi- 
ness, as well as probably by its lesser volume. For instance, 
one dry goods dealer charges off 20 per cent, of the difference 
between cost and selling price to rent, where a corresponding 
dealer in groceries charges off only 10 per cent. A dealer 
points out : — 

The retailer never advances the price on a 1-cent advance at whole- 
sale. If there is anything that demoralizes the retail trade, it is a 
change in price; and he will not change the price until the advance 
is so great and permanent that he is obliged to, or stand a heavy loss. 

On the other hand, it is doubtless true that in these days 
many a shrewd and sharp trader is taking the common knowl- 
edge of increase in cost of living as an excuse for raising prices 
unduly. 

Meat Profits. — According to an investigation of the United 
States Department of Agriculture the gross profit on beef in 
Boston is 36 per cent. We asked Louis B. Noyes, president of 
the T. H. Wheeler and the Hyde-Wheeler Companies, about 
this, and he replied : — 

I think Secretary Wilson is wrong there; I think he has made a 
mistake in his figures. I don't believe there is any such difference as 
that. As I said, I don't know from absolute knowledge. 



296 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

A beef wholesaler writes to us from the western part of the 
State : — 

My impression is that the prices of the retailer on beef as a whole 
are about 25 per cent, in excess of the cost price. This of course 
varies among different dealers, some selling as low as 15 or 20 per 
cent., and others getting as much as 30 or 35 per cent. To me it is 
idle for anybody to lay up any great criticism against the retail dealer. 
He is a very hard-working merchant, and puts in long hours. I am 
almost sure that not over 5 per cent, of all of them make anything 
better than a bare living out of their business. Like all small mer- 
chants, it takes an exceptionally crafty man with a good trading instinct 
to handle and sell beef and make any money. If you will be good 
enough to run over in your mind the different men in the retail business 
with whom you have personally been acquainted, I think you will recall 
very few who have ever laid up any money in the business. 

Charles H. Farnsworth of the firm of Farnsworth, Benjamin 
& Mills was asked by us : " Do you think the percentage of prof- 
fit that the retailers get has been rising or falling in the last 
ten years ? " He replied : — 

Falling, — falling materially, — no question about that. It is getting 
nearer and nearer what we call the granulated sugar basis. The whole- 
sale cost being greater, the result is that the profit is less. 

A firm of commission merchants writes : — 

A large majority of the retailers are having a hard struggle to get 
a new dollar for an old one; and the net percentage of earnings of 
a few who are a little more prosperous runs generally from 7 to 10 
per cent. 

We asked P. L. Hughes of the Cudahy Packing Company 
what gross profit the retailer in the Boston market district 
would have to get to make both ends meet. He replied : — 

I think the retailer would have to get 50 per cent., — the ordinary 
retailer, who has teams and has to maintain refrigeration and pay high 
rents; and, with the small volume of business they do, I don't believe 
they could get along and make a living short of 50 per cent, profit. 
Of course that would vary greatly, but I am giving you an average. 

Fred Clark of the K"orth Packing and Provision Company, 
Somerville, was of the opinion that the retailer in hog products 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 297 

has to get 35 or 40 per cent, gross profit before he can make 
any money. 

One fact not commonly appreciated is that an advance of 2 
cents a pound in the retail price does not cover an advance of 1 
cent at wholesale, for the reason that the butcher is selling 
trimmed meats, and does not get any advance on his bones, fat 
trimmings and other waste in cutting up, while he himself has 
to pay the advance on every pound that he buys. 

Groceries and Provisions. — A dealer in groceries and pro- 
visions in a Boston suburb, who did a business of $40,000 last 
year, informs us that his net profit was 4.8 per cent., which 
would hardly be called excessive. He writes : — 

There is on meats a shrinkage of practically 50 per cent, in weight 
between the wholesaler and the consumer, which makes the price to 
the consumer look large, and causes him to think that the retailer is 
" getting it." In the grocery department we find no chance for ex- 
cessive profits. We make good profits on some lines, — teas, coffees, 
molasses, etc.; and, on the other hand, sell some lines at a loss. Sugar 
is sold at a loss. We make no profit on flour, break about even on 
13, 23 and 45 cent goods that should sell for 15, 25 and 50 cents, 
and the " two-f or-a-quarter " and " three-for-a-quarter " grafts wipe 
out the profit on these lines. The retailer works thirteen to fifteen 
hours a day, and gets about as little for it as any one I know of. 

A grocer writes from the western part of the State : — 

The retailer, because of competition with department stores that 
carry groceries, cannot advance retail prices in proportion to whole- 
sale. The margin between retail and wholesale is at least 5 per cent, 
less now than ten years ago. 

Wallace L. Pierce of the S. S. Pierce Company, Boston, said 
to the Senate committee at Washington : — 

I have an idea that our gross profit at retail is 16 per cent., and at 
wholesale it is 10 and 12 per cent. 

The manager of their Tremont Street store, Fred L. Hiller, 
told us that last year their profits were $93,000 less than the 
year before, and Mr. Pierce told the Senate committee the same 
thing. Mr. Hiller said : — 



298 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

We did much more business. Of course, if the market is steady, 
some goods going up and some going down, then one hand washes 
the other; but when they are all on the increase, as they have been 
in the last three or four years, the dealer loses every time, and that, 
on sales of nearly $7,000,000 a year, means a great deal. 

Frank Tilford of Park & Tilford, the big New York grocers, 
said to the Senate committee : — 

We do twice the business we did ten years ago, and our profits are 
less in the aggregate. 

Finley Acker, the leading grocer of Philadelphia, said, in the 
April " Delineator " : — 

The cause for the rising cost of living does not belong at the door 
of the retail grocer, for this business represents the smallest net return 
for the required hours of labor and upon the invested capital. Nearly 
all the staple articles, such, for instance, as sugar, are sold much below 
actual cost. We make no attempt to conceal the percentage of net 
profit in our own business. It is less than 5 cents on every dollar's 
worth sold. 

The testimony of the retailers who have appeared before the 
Senate committee at Washington has all been to the same effect. 
A typical witness was E. F. Hall of Washington, groceries and 
provisions, who said that he figured on a gross profit of 15 per 
cent., but was satisfied with a net profit of 5. In the last Hve 
years he had increased his business from $60,000 to $100,000, 
with very little more expense, but his profits remained about the 
same. James F. Oyster, butter dealer of Washington, said : — 

As compared with five or ten years ago, the merchants are making 
less money in our line of business. 

S. K. Harrison of Baltimore, grocer, said that his firm did an 
annual business of $80,000, catering to the best trade ; that his 
net profit was from 5 to 7 per cent. ; that he and his partner 
drew no salaries, and that if they had drawn salaries the busi- 
ness would have shown no profit whatever. H. Sonnehill, 
Baltimore grocer, pointed out that " the percentage of profit 
is no greater when the price is high than when it is low ; " and 
that, as the investment is bigger, the percentage of profit is 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 299 

less. " The retailer does not get the advantage of high prices. 
It is worse for the retailer." 

Department and General Stores. — John Wanamaker said to 
the Industrial Commission in 1899 : — 

It can be stated with a fair degree of certainty that the net profits 
of the sales departments of the great retail stores vary from 3 to 6 
per cent, on the dollar of business done. 

We asked Elwyn G. Preston of the K. H. White Company 
how closely the retail price follows the wholesale. He re- 
plied : — 

The margin of profit in a department store is so very small that it 
must necessarily follow with substantial accuracy the amount of the 
wholesale mark. One per cent, in the profit of a department store 
is a very large sum, and it might spell the difference between actual 
loss and profit ; so necessarily it cannot vary very much. It is, however, 
true that the margin in certain lines is not so large as it was a year 
ago, and I think I might say that the average per cent, is slightly 
less than it was ten years ago. Our expenses are materially larger. 

Joseph L. Chalifoux, the department store merchant of 
Lowell, told the Industrial Commission that the department 
store gets, in paying cash, about 1 per cent, trade discount, 
which the average small trader does not get. He was of the 
belief that the expenses of running a small store, doing a busi- 
ness of say $10,000, must be at least 25 per cent. 

A general storekeeper in Berkshire County writes to us : — 

We are selling goods at a less per cent, of profit now than we were 
five years ago. As the wholesale price has advanced, we have found 
it very hard to advance the retail price. For instance, a few years 
ago we bought meal for- $1 per hundredweight, sold it at $1.10, and 
made 10 per cent. : now we have to pay $1.40, and can get but $1.50. 

The proprietors of a general store in Franklin County 
write : — 

Our impression is that with several competitors within a few rods 
and mail-order houses all over the country, the dealer who holds his 
goods at an unreasonable price gets left. 



300 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Dry Goods and Clothing. — John Wanamaker said to the 
Industrial Commission in 1899 : — 

Upon American dry goods generally the retailer's percentage of 
profits has been reduced one-half during the last twenty years. This 
is true upon woolen, silk and cotton fabrics. 

This he ascribed to the effect of modern methods of retailing. 
A retail dry-goods dealer writes to us : — 

The steady advance in the retail cotton market has not equalled the 
wholesale advance; therefore a less profit for the small retailer. 

Another writes : — 

I find I have to do a greater volume of business each year to keep 
up an average profit. 

Another : — 

When I started in business, twelve years ago, we figTired on a profit 
of 30 per cent, above wholesale prices; to-day my profit between retail 
and wholesale is not more than 20 per cent. 

The proprietor of a Hampden County dry goods store 
writes : — 

The business no longer shows a profit, and is being closed out. 

George A. Macomber of the Talbot Clothing Company, Bos- 
ton, said to us : — 

We have a good many retail stores. Labor, rent, everything that 
goes into the cost of doing business, has increased, but not the net 
profits. On $1,000 of sales you have to make $250 gross profit in 
order to pay the expenses of doing business. Probably the gross and 
net profits combined would be 30 per cent. We ourselves are the 
manufacturer, jobber and retailer, you might say. Now, on our $7.50 
suit a fair price would be $12 at retail. Maybe an occasional man will 
get $15 for a few suits, say on one special line. On the other hand, 
we retail many suits at $10 that we make at $7.50, — that is, the first 
season; later there is a mark-down. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 301 

Capt. P. B. Henry of Browning, King & Co., said to us: — 
I don't think there is any material increase in the profit. 

Boots and Shoes. — We asked George E. Keith, the Brockton 
manufacturer, what gross profits the shoe retailers ought to 
make, and he replied : — 

He ought to have from 30 per cent, to 35 per cent., less the expenses. 
If he does not make that, he cannot make any money. 

Charles H. Jones of the Commonwealth Shoe and Leather 
Company said : — 

"We are interested in retail stores, as well as in manufacturing, and 
we believe that the actual cost to the retailer in disposing of his goods 
will average 30 per cent. Some large retailers will get that down 
to 26 or 27 per cent.; with others it will run to 34 and 35 per cent. 
You take a high-class retail store to-day, and the customer demands 
a great deal better attention. If a gentleman walks into that store 
and every clerk is busy, and he has to stand around a moment or two, 
he walks out and goes down to a store on the other side of the street. 
If you undertake to deliver by the aid of the parcel delivery, he is 
not satisfied; he wants the shoes sent to him the afternoon that he buys 
them. If goods are sent that way, and every purchaser is attended 
to the instant he comes in, that makes additional cost, and the expense 
cannot be less, in my opinion, than 30 per cent., — the selling price, 
usually. You can figure that on the shoe I have mentioned, and you 
find that the retailer does not get 30 per cent., — not over 26 or 27 
per cent; so the leading lines of the shoes that sell, he may sell for 
nothing. You make the money on the intermediate shoes, or women's 
shoes. 

We asked Mr. Jones if he could suggest any way in which the 
cost can be reduced to the consumer, and he replied : — 

Not so long as the consumer demands constant improvement and 
change in style, and not so long as the consumer demands the out- 
fitting expense to which the retailer is necessarily put. 

Lewis A. Crossett, another leading manufacturer, said to 
us: — 

In my judgment, the retailer is having a very close pull to-day, — 
a very close pull, because the matter of rents makes a difference. 



302 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

They have increased enormously. You must remember that the average 
retailer through the country does not do a large business; I should say 
the average would be somewhere around $30,000. Now, if he has to 
pay clerk hire, rent and light, and the delivery charge of sales, de- 
preciation, etc., he is having too heavy a load. I am in close touch 
with them, and they are not getting profit enough. We are doing every- 
thing we can to help them get more profit, and unless they do get 
more money, they never can stand the competition of to-day. I have 
two stores in mind on Tremont Street, in Boston, that pay a rent, 
to begin with, all the way from $10,000 to $18,000 a year. 

A dealer in shoes and men's furnishings in one of the smaller 
towns writes : — 

Where we used to get a profit on an average of 25 per cent., now 
we get only 20. 

Another shoe dealer reports : — 

In the shoe retail business it is becoming more difficult to make profits, 
on account of the tremendous increase in number of styles, leathers 
and widths, compelling a large stock for the same amount of business. 

A Boston shoe dealer says : — 

Net profits on our sales are about 2 per cent, less, owing to a slight 
advance in some lines on which we can't get any advance. 

A Bristol County shoe dealer writes : — 

There has never been a time in my experience in the shoe business 
for the past twenty-five years that profits were so small as at the 
present time. Shoes are costing us from 2 to 25 cents a pair more 
on many lines, and we have to sell them for the same price. Our 
gross profits average from 22 to 23 per cent. It costs us around 18 
per cent, of this to do business. Manufacturers that gave 5 per cent, 
off for cash now give 2, and those giving 2 and 3 are now giving 1, 
and many of them are net. 

A Middlesex County man writes : — 

Competition was so fierce and profits were so close that after a four 
years' trial of the retail shoe business I found I was not getting the 
interest on the money invested, and was drawing only $10 a week for 
living expenses. I sold out my stock and got out to make room for 
some other man to drop some money. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 303 

Causes of Increased Cost. — Naturally, there is a wide range 
in rent cost from the rural dealer with his small store and light 
rental to the city merchant with his large quarters and heavy 
rent. Taking the State as a whole, the retailer counts in his 
rent at about 18 per cent, of what he expects to get for his 
goods over their cost. 

The increase in rentals in the past decade is placed by one 
merchant in a small city at 16 per cent. From one boot and 
shoe dealer in a large city comes the complaint that rents have 
increased because of what he calls " an absurd idea of the value 
of business locations/' Another gives the increased rental as 
the sole reason why it costs more to carry on business now than 
it did ten years ago. He says rentals have jumped 30 per cent, 
in his city in that time. 

Many think that the increase in wages is the chief reason for 
the increase in the cost of selling in the past ten years. That 
the labor unions have brought this about is the claim of a few ; 
but in most cases it is admitted that, as living is higher from so 
many causes, the demand for higher compensation is a natural 
consequence. Again, many declare that in these days of fierce 
competition more skilled help must be employed. One return 
gives the increase in wages in ten years at 20 per cent. 

Wallace L. Pierce of the S. S. Pierce Company estimated to 
the Senate committee that their wage increase had been from 
20 to 25 per cent, in fifteen years. 

It is well known that in the retail sections of large cities 
there has been an enormous increase of rental values, due to 
the effort of the middlemen to secure the best locations. The 
consumer pays tribute to the land owner, through the store- 
keeper, in higher prices. 

We are inclined to think, however, that in the case of nearly 
all the city shops the most potent factor has been the increase 
in the cost of delivering merchandise. Every city retailer doing 
a business of any size complains of this. Nobody now wants to 
carry bundles. 

Elwyn G. Preston of the K. H. White Company said to us : — - 

All the stores in Boston have extended their expenses in free deliv- 
eries. TVe deliver packages of $1 in value all over Massachusetts. 
When you consider that perhaps the average cost of transjDorting the 



304 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

packages outside the limits of our own free team delivery is between 
15 and 20 cents per package, you see you have expended in the de- 
livery of the package to the consumer at least 15 per cent, of its value, 
under such circumstances. This increased delivery is a very heavy 
element in the expense. We find that the cost of deliveries, that is to 
say, the cost of teams and drivers and express charges, over the total 
business of the store will average about 1.7 per cent. On the goods 
actually delivered at our expense it would, of course, be much higher. 
I believe these figures would represent about the average for all stores 
of this class. 

Capt. P. B. Henry of Browning, King & Co., Fred C. Gar- 
mon of the Leopold Morse Company, Fred L. Hiller of the 
S. S. Pierce Company, and others, testified as to this increase 
of delivery costs. Mr. Henry said : — 

A few years ago in New York we only prepaid for 100 miles. Now 
the large stores there say they will send to any town in any State in 
the Union, to Porto Rico, Hawaii, or almost to the Philippine Islands, 
when the purchase amounts to $5 or more. 

Mr. Garmon said : — 

A few years ago we delivered very little, and now small articles are 
sent quite a distance, so much so that it will eat up all the profit in 
it; but we do that as a matter of policy. 

Wallace L. Pierce of the S. S. Pierce Company, Boston, told 
the Senate committee at Washington that the stable costs of his 
house increased last year from $88,000 to $103,000. He 
thought the cost of boarding horses had increased from $5.50 to 
$7 a week in ten years. Frank Tilford of Park & Tilford, 
New York, testified that their stable expenses had increased, 
but not so much. " In Boston/' he said, by the way, " they 
do not require the prompt deliveries that they do in 2\ ew York ; 
we have to make deliveries every hour." Perhaps Boston will 
come to that. 

In Dr. Crowell's report to the Industrial Commission it 
was stated that the difference in consumers 7 price for a family 
which goes to market and for one which has the market com* 1 to 
it is not less than from 10 to 15 per cent. This statement mast 
refer simply to the savings possible from selection, for the un- 
fortunate thing is that the housekeeper who goes to market 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 305 

rarely gets any discount because she carries home the bundles. 
As a rule, we pay our share in the cost of delivery, whether we 
use it or not. This is unfair; also, it is wasteful, for it takes 
away the incentive to be self-reliant. The evils of the system 
stimulate their own growth. 

Bad Debts and Credit-buying. — Dealers who wrote to us re- 
ported losses of from 1 to 4 per cent, from " bad debts." They 
did not emphasize it as important, nor did representatives of the 
large Boston houses who came before us. Naturally, traders 
are loth to admit in writing or on the witness stand that they 
are such poor business men as to lose much by giving credit. 
Yet the growth of retail credit must be set down as one of the 
causes for the excessive costs of distribution. 

In the past fifteen years there has been a notable change in 
the attitude of retail establishments in this matter. The big 
stores have come to vie with each other in urging persons to 
" open accounts." Furthermore, the credit system was formerly 
used almost entirely by the well-to-do, the poor being given but 
slight opportunity to use it. Of late there has been a large ex- 
tension of it by the instalment stores, where furniture, clothing, 
jewelry, household goods, in fact, almost every needed article 
except food, can be procured by the payment down of a small 
part of the price, the balance being paid in instalments, as 
agreed upon at the time of purchase. The retail dealers would 
naturally not object to the continuance of the system, if their 
bills were paid with some regard to promptness ; but it is their 
general testimony that both the poor and the rich often take 
advantage of their opportunities, and fail to pay their indebted- 
ness. 

Four years ago the Bureau of Statistics of Labor undertook an 
investigation of noncollectable indebtedness, or " bad debts," in 
Boston. The whole number of dealers reporting was 1,183, and 
the number of debtors reported 72,540. The total amount of 
noncollectable indebtedness was $1,064,384. Of this amount, 
$704,433, or 66.18 per cent., was owed by the wage-earning 
class; $276,116, or 25.94 per cent., by the trade class; $49,990, 
or 4.70 per cent., by the professional class; and $33,845, or 3.18 
per cent., by the moneyed class. 

It was impossible to obtain the number of duplications among 



306 . COST OF LIVING. [May, 

the 72,540 persons. The same person may have become indebted 
for groceries in different parts of the city or at different stores 
in the same part of the city; but it was evident, making a 
liberal allowance for these duplications, that at least 10 per 
cent, of the residents of Boston, in the year 1904, were indebted 
for their food, rent, clothing, furniture or funeral expenses, 
and that the dealers who gave them credit had given up all hope 
of receiving payment therefor. 

Of course, unless the dealer deducts the loss from his net 
profits, sooner or later the customer who pays his own bills pays 
therein the bad debts of other people. By so much is the cost of 
living increased to the honest man. 

The case is different with the credit house doing business on 
the instalment plan. It avowedly charges more for its goods, 
because of the cost of the credit. Ordinarily, it adds 10 per cent. 
to what would be the cash price, and it contends that this is no 
more than is reasonable for the interest on the capital required 
and the expense of doing the business in that way. The poor 
man has just as much right as the rich man to what advantages 
credit may present. His need of temporary help may be just as 
great, even if on a far smaller money scale. But he, too, must 
pay for the disadvantage of credit. 

In offset to all this, it is to be noted that the introduction of 
the sale of groceries and provisions in department stores, and 
the establishment of many stores controlled by wholesalers and 
corporations selling at low prices, have obliged many retail 
dealers to abolish the credit system in order to compete with 
these stores, which they can only do by selling for cash. It is 
encouraging to see that there is generally among the grocery 
and provision dealers a tendency to refuse credit, and to carry 
on their business so far as possible on a cash basis. 

In order to ascertain whether there has been during the past 
few years any abnormal increase in the proportion of credit- 
buying in retail stores, as well as whether there has been any 
increase in the proportion of bad bills, and whether retail prices 
have been affected by such increase, an agent of the commission 
interviewed the managers or treasurers of department stores. 
All agreed that there had been no abnormal increase during the 
past few years. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 307 

The credit manager of the Wm. Filene Sons Company said 
that he had noticed no tendency in recent years to increase the 
number of applications for credit or the difficulty of collection. 
The losses from bad accounts should not exceed % of 1 per cent. 

Elwyn G. Preston of the K. H. White Company said that 
their credit business had increased 50 per cent, in the last five 
years, but that it was due entirely to the policy of the house to 
solicit that kind of business. There has been no noticeable in- 
crease in the time of credit or in the proportion of bad bills. 
The average time on accounts is thirty days, and the proportion 
of losses is less than Vio of 1 per cent. Their credit business 
is about 35 per cent, of the total business. 

The treasurer of the Henry Siegel Company said that he had 
noticed no abnormal increase in their charge business, but simply 
the natural and expected increase, and that there had been no in- 
crease in the percentage of bad bills. The percentage of loss is 
about Vs of 1 per cent., and the average length of credit forty- 
five days. The amount of credit business of the Siegel Com- 
pany ranges from 30 to 35 per cent, of the total business. 

So far as any inferences may be drawn from the facts and 
statements furnished by the parties interviewed, they would 
seem to support the opinion expressed by all of them that any 
increase that had taken place in their charge business was the 
result of a general policy to solicit that business, and that its 
effect on prices was entirely negligible. The percentage of losses 
is infinitesimal, and has not increased. The general opinion 
was that the credit customer was picked with such care as to 
preclude any considerable loss. The effect of credit buying is 
on the buyer himself, — he buys more than he needs ; and this, 
as one credit man said, is the reason why the business is solicited. 

If there has been any general tendency to buy on credit, it 
ought to be apparent in an abnormal increase of business in a 
concern like that of the Washburn Credit Clothing Company. 
This, Mr. Washburn said, had not taken place; but, on the 
contrary, the business of all the credit houses had been retarded 
the past three years. In an experience of twenty-seven years, 
covering four panics, he had always found a great increase in 
his business during and following a panic; but this had not 
taken place in 1907 and since that year. His explanation is that 



308 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



prices in general became so high that people bought only the 
necessities, — food, fuel, etc., — and spent far less on clothes, 
which brought about a natural falling off in his business. He 
also has observed a very noticeable increase in the per cent, of 
bad bills, and of the time required for payment, during the last 
three years. 

The effect of charging purchases is much more apparent in 
the provision business than in the large department stores, be- 
cause in the former case prices on various commodities can be 
compared, while in the latter this is not feasible. Two large 
cash markets in different places were visited, and their prices 
compared with neighboring stores doing a charge business. 
Here is the result in the case of the Manhattan market of Cam- 
bridge and a neighboring store : — 



Commodity. 


Manhattan 
Market. 


Neighboring 
Store. 


Butter (per pound), 

Eggs (per dozen), 

Sirloin steaks (per pound), 

Sirloin roasts (per pound), 

Round roast (per pound), 

Lamb, leg (per pound), 

Lamb, forequarter (per pound) 

Pork strip (per pound), 

Potatoes (per peck), 


Cents. 
33, 34, 35 

25, 28, 33 

18-30 

22, 25, 28, 30 

16, 17 

18-22 

12-16 

17 

15 


Cents. 

38-40 

33 

30 

28-30 

20 

22 

15 

18 

20 



The following is a comparison of Janes Brothers market in 
TTaltham with two other markets doing a business largely 
charged; the first, Xo. 1, is a meat and provision store and the 
second, Xo. 2, a grocery and provision store, both old and 
well established : — 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



309 



Commodity. 


Janes 
Brothers. 


No. 1. 


No. 2. 


Sirloin steak (per pound), . 


Cents. 
18-25, 33 


Cents. 
35 


Cents. 
30, 35, 40 


Rib roast (per pound), . 






16, 20 


20 


22 


Rump roast (per pound), 






12, 15, 20 


12H. 16, 20 


20 


Round roast (per pound), 






25 


30 


30 


Lamb, forequarter (per pound), 






15 


18 


18 


Lamb, leg (per pound), . 






22 


25 


25 


Lamb chops (per pound), 






30 


35,40 


30, 35 


Pork strip (per pound), . 






18 


22 


20 


Pork chops (per pound), 






19 


23 


22 


Bacon (per pound), 






24 


25 


25 


Hams, boiled (per pound), 






35 


20 


35 


Potatoes (per peck), 






15 


28 


20 


Butter (per pound), 






32 


25,35 


38 


Eggs (per dozen), . 






25, 28 


- . 


35 



The difference is not so noticeable in the case of the Man- 
hattan market, since the market chosen for comparison, being 
situated near by on the same street, had apparently felt the effect 
of the competition. 

The great advantage of the Manhattan market, in regard to 
meats, as the manager said, was in the great variety of cuts. 
While the other market had bnt one price for sirloin steak and 
only one or two prices for roasts, the Manhattan market varies 
its price according to the cut. The high price appears to equal 
the price which the other market charges for all cuts, and the 
prices then range downward, the purchaser paying according to 
what he gets; whereas in the other market all pay the same 
price, and take their chances on the kind of cut they get. In 
this way the average saving on beef must be at least from 10 to 
15 per cent, to the cash buyers; the saving on lamb is about the 
same. On the potatoes the saving at the prices obtained was 25 
per cent., and on butter from 10 to 12 per cent. 

In the case of Janes Brothers market the statement in regard 
to the greater variety of cuts is true, but hardly to the same 
extent. The savings here on steak are somewhat difficult to 
determine. If an average of Janes Brothers prices be taken, 
the saving is as high as 20 per cent. If their high price be 



310 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

compared with the other, the saving is upward of 6 per cent. 
The savings in other commodities, as near as can be figured, 
are as follows : on rib roast, from 10 to 15 per cent. ; on rump 
roast, about 5 per cent. ; on round roast, 20 per cent. ; on lamb 
forequarter, 20 per cent. ; on lamb leg, 15 per cent. ; on lamb 
chops, 15 per cent. ; on pork strip, 20 per cent. ; on pork chops, 
20 per cent. ; on bacon, 4 per cent. ; on potatoes, 25 per cent. ; 
on butter, 16 per cent. 

There is, then, on meats, provisions, etc., a saving on the 
average of about 15 per cent, in the cash markets. But this 
saving cannot be attributed solely to the absence of charge 
accounts. Among other causes, the charge men said that the 
cash markets furnished an inferior quality of meat. This may 
be so, especially where the credit markets are well established 
and have a well-chosen list of customers. Just what the effect 
of this is, of course, we have no data upon which to estimate. 

Eliminating the factor of poorer quality, and also that of 
jobbers' commissions saved by the big store or the chain of 
stores, which does not affect the meat prices, it will be found 
that a considerable saving remains which must be attributed to 
the cash system. On meats, the entire saving, leaving out the 
difference in quality, must be due to this ; and one of the 
Waltham dealers agreed that trusting his customers did in fact 
increase prices. His bills sometimes run six months. But the 
charge system has always existed, and the cash markets are a 
growth of more recent times. Therefore, it must be considered 
that the cash market has been an important factor in recent 
years tending to keep prices down. On the other hand, the 
charge markets were unanimous in the opinion that there has 
recently been a marked tendency to increase the difficulty of 
collecting accounts and to extend the time for payment. The 
manager of Cobb, Bates & Yerxa's store, which has a well- 
selected credit list, said that there had been a very noticeable 
tendency in this direction in his store. He did not think, how- 
ever, that its effect on prices was material. The general con- 
clusion, therefore, is that, though an increase in credit-buying 
has taken place, it is very doubtful if any considerable portion 
of the increase in retail prices results therefrom, especially 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 311 

when the counteracting influence of the cash market is con- 
sidered. To estimate just what portion of increase of retail 
prices is due to an increase in charging accounts, it would be 
necessary to find what proportion of the business now is credit, 
what the percentage of bad bills, and what the average length 
of credit, and compare these with the same facts at some prior 
period, say ten years ago; but the bookkeeping system of the 
stores visited was not in such shape as to furnish these necessary 
facts. 

Alfred P. Lee of the Cloverdale Company told us why the 
chain of cash stores can undersell. He said : — 

We sell no goods on credit, and we do no delivering, and we keep 
no books except at headquarters. We are cutting the very finest of 
butter that we can have from the tub at 34 cents to-day. That has 
been our price for more than two months. I presume that the ordinary 
grocery man, where he sells a person on time and loses a bill now and 
then, and has to go to a good deal of expense for keeping delivery 
wagons and bookkeepers for keeping his accounts, would get 38 or 
40 cents, — and he ought to. Every business man, and more especially 
in our line, has reached the point where he has run up against com- 
petition so long that he must do something in order to hold his own. 
I tell you it has been no flowery bed of ease for the business man in 
our line for the last two or three years. Now we buy our coffee and 
our teas direct. All of our teas are imported to us. Our coffees we 
buy right from the importers, and we put that coffee right out direct 
to retail, instead of having it go through a middleman, as we used to 
sell it. We save all that profit. In buying our goods we arrange with 
packers in Maine or in the west, who ship us those goods direct, in- 
stead of buying them through some other person that would buy from 
them, and those people make a little profit. There is no intermediate 
profit between the goods that we buy from the producer and our prices. 
They are sold to the retail stores. And by buying our goods in quan- 
tities, and buying them at first hand and cutting out the middle price, 
it enables us to make a price that ordinarily cannot be made where 
a grocery man goes into a jobbing house and is trusted thirty or sixty 
days, and then has to send those goods out to his customers. He has 
to have a little better price. 

Miscellaneous Costs. — For " other store expenses," which 
would include lighting, heating, new fixtures, repairs, etc., the 
average allowance by the retailers reporting to us runs from 5 



312 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

to 20 per cent, of the gross profits. Miscellaneous charges, in- 
cluding such things as taxes and insurance, run all the way from 
3 to 20 per cent. 

The cost of the plant for a retail store, including interest on 
investment and depreciation, has within the last generation 
become an important item of shop-keeping expense. Sixty years 
ago there was probably not a light of plate glass in any retail 
store in the United States. To-day no store is up to date without 
plate glass windows. Elaborate cabinet work must now be pro- 
vided in the city shops. A department store with fixtures costing 
a quarter of a million dollars must obtain a continuous return on 
the investment. Of course the customer pays it. 

Advertising ranges widely, according to the class of business 
and the size of the place, with the amount of competition. 
Under this head from 2 to 10 per cent, of the gross profit is 
marked off by the retailers reporting to us. 

Among other causes mentioned to us by correspondents as 
contributing to the greater cost of doing business over ten years 
ago are higher freight and express rates, higher prices for grain 
and hay, increase in advertising rates, exodus from country to 
city, speculative farming and shorter hours. " The cost of doing 
business has increased so much that I have decided to dis- 
continue it," is the remark of one dealer in provisions. 

This is a field where averages are exceptionally dangerous; 
but it may be safe to say the chances are that, of a dollar spent 
in one of the smaller shops dealing in staple goods, 4.1 cents 
will go toward paying rent; 6.2 cents toward wages; 2.3 cents, 
other store expenses; .7 cents, losses from bad debts; 1.1 cents, 
advertising; 1.1 cents, miscellaneous costs; 7.3 cents, profits of 
the proprietor; and 77.2 cents to the wholesaler. 

Taking the averages for what they may be worth, the margin 
between wholesale and retail prices appears to divide itself 
thus : rent, 18 per cent. ; wages, 27 per cent. ; other store ex- 
penses, 10 per cent. ; bad debts, 3 per cent. ; advertising, 5 per 
cent. ; miscellaneous, 5 per cent. ; profit, 32 per cent. 

With the wide difference in expense items, the net profits of 
the retailer, whether charged off as salaries, dividends or profits, 
naturally vary greatly. The margin appears larger in the case 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 313 

of those concerns handling dry goods, clothing and foot wear 
than among those selling provisions. 

If the testimony of the dealers is creditable, it must be ac- 
cepted that retail profits have not been rising, but that they have 
been falling, and that the blame for the increase in prices is 
not to be laid at the door of the retailer. 

The Massachusetts census of trade in 1905 was the first ever 
undertaken by any State or country, so that comparisons are 
impossible, but the figures are of themselves suggestive. There 
were in the State 12,441 establishments selling food and food 
products at retail, or 1 to every 241 inhabitants. No marked 
change is believed since to have taken place ; certainly there has 
not been change enough to indicate that the State is yet under- 
supplied with retail stores. With such competition as the 
figures suggest, it would seem incredible that any great amount 
of combination to regulate retail food prices can exist in Mas- 
sachusetts. These 12,441 retail establishments had on the 
average $2,489 in capital invested, and as some were, of course, 
large, it is not probable that the greater part of them had more 
than $2,000 invested. Under such conditions monopoly is of 
course out of the question. They averaged to sell $14,569 of 
goods a year, so that it is hard to see how most of them could 
have made a profit that by any stretch of the imagination would 
be called unreasonable, in view of the wholesale cost of the 
goods, the rent, delivery, wages and the other running expenses. 

John Wanamaker said to the Industrial Commission : — 

This is a well-known fact, that statistics have been gathered during 
the last sixty years by economic writers and mercantile associations 
at various periods, uniformly showing that but 4 per cent, of all that 
embarked in mercantile business succeeded; in other words, that 96 
out of every 100 in some way failed of success. An authority as eminent 
as the late A. T. Stewart claimed that not more than 2 per cent, suc- 
ceeded in business. 

Any thoughtless critic, who avers that the retail shopkeepers 
of Massachusetts are getting rich at the expense of the con- 
sumers, will do well to cast over in his own mind the record of 
those who have done business in his immediate neighborhood. 
Let him recall how many have failed, let him count up how 



314 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

many lie has known who remain in business, let him estimate 
the percentage who have become comfortably well off, and let 
him name those who have amassed what he would call wealth. 

Under such conditions as prevail, with an excessive number of 
shops, and retail price agreements for the most part an impossi- 
bility, it is practically certain that competition will keep retail 
profits down to the minimum. The fact that certain rates of 
profit remain constant year after year, or show a decrease, if 
anything, must be taken as presumptive evidence that they are 
the rates determined by supply and demand. What a shop- 
keeper can get in the open market, without fraud or conspiracy, 
is the measure of his deserts under our competitive system. It 
does not appear that to-day in Massachusetts he is getting more 
than his share. 

Speculation and its Effects. — As Dr. Crowell pointed out, 
this whole system, from producer to consumer, is speculative, 
and of course it develops all the evils of which speculation is 
capable. Speculation has great benefits not to be denied, for 
without it the world might not store up food in time of plenty 
against time of famine. So it has been ever since Joseph, the 
first great speculator, interpreted the dream of Pharaoh and 
for seven plenteous years gathered up all the food of Egypt; 
then, when the seven lean years came, he opened all the store- 
house and sold to the Egyptians : " and all countries came into 
Egypt to Joseph for to buy corn; because that the famine was 
so sore in all lands." 

But speculation brings evils in its train, — monopoly, fore- 
stalling, oppression. President Bothwell of the Chamber of 
Commerce has already been quoted as to its operation in the 
case of wheat. 1 Another informant tells us that not till three 
or four years ago did the speculators start in before the crop 
was out of the ground; that the change has led farmers to 
hold their products, and has given them part of the benefit of 
the rise in prices. 

Still another sagacious observer holds that when a speculator 
like Patten makes millions, he simply transfers them from the 
pockets of other gamblers to his own. Yet it would not seem 

i See p. 132. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 315 

impossible that in the process the consuming public also pays 
tribute. 

There is comparatively little gambling in futures in Boston, 
and in any event it is a problem with which only the national 
government can cope adequately. But if any aid can be given 
by State legislation, its wisdom should be considered. 

The Evils and their Remedies. — Manifestly the most waste- 
ful part of our economic system is that concerned with dis- 
tribution. 

In production we are far ahead of any previous period in the 
world's history. Our agriculture has hitherto supplied the needs 
of a rapidly growing population, even if now it must be de- 
veloped more intensively. The progress of our manufactures 
has been marvelous, and their condition is satisfactory. We 
have seen that there is no ground for fearing that on the whole 
the consumer has to pay an excessive reward to manufacturing 
capital. 

In matters of consumption we are too extravagant, too 
luxurious, too careless, too wasteful, though we are attacking 
the problems. 

But in distribution, in getting the product to the consumer in 
the least costly way, we make no progress, unless it be in the 
one particular of transportation. On the other hand, there is 
enormous waste of effort. 

John F. Tobin, the leading representative of organized labor 
in the shoe industry, said to us : — 

If the manufacturer has a profit of 8 cents per pair on shoes re- 
tailing at $3.50, while all the workers — with three or four hundred 
subdivisions of labor, and each paid at the rate of the smallest fraction 
of a cent — receive only 60 cents per pair, and the retailer gets $1 
or $1.25 for lacing up the shoe and fitting it on the customer, then 
the latter is getting more than his share. 

We have seen, however, that after paying his expenses the 
shoe retailer makes no exorbitant profit. 
Mr. Tobin went on to say, wisely : — 

I think our whole system is faulty in the method of distribution. 
Socialists talk about public ownership of the means of production. 



316 COST OF LIVING. [May., 

I think most people attach too little importance to the distribution 
of commodities. That is the great problem. 

Every investigation of the high retail prices of agricultural 
produce — meats, cereals, dairy, vegetable or fruit products — 
has shown an enormous gap between the price received by the 
first producer and that paid by the ultimate consumer, an 
ever-widening gap, for which a complicated system of distrib- 
uting middlemen is largely responsible. All agree that some 
middlemen are essential, and that they perform valuable services 
in forwarding, storing and preparing the raw material for con- 
sumption. All agree, too, that a long line of commission men, 
produce merchants, jobbers, hucksters, retailers and what not, 
simply passing goods from hand to hand, like a bucket brigade 
at a fire, is not only inefficient and wasteful, but very costly. 
In these days a hydrant and a line of hose are wanted. To the 
observer it would seem that nowhere in the United States is the 
consumer of certain farm products nearer the source of supply 
than in southern New England; nowhere is it easier for the 
consumer to make his wants known; and nowhere is it more 
easily possible for produce exchanges and boards of trade to 
encourage, and co-operate in securing, more direct and imme- 
diate connection between country shippers and city buyers. 

The waste is not the fault of the middlemen; it is the fault 
of the system. The middlemen are but the agents of an im- 
perfect, wasteful system. They are not to be blamed because 
they make a living out of it. To illustrate : Dr. Crowell's report 
to the Industrial Commission showed that the expenses of distrib- 
uting a 40-quart can of milk to tenement families in New York 
City were 68 per cent, of its cost to the consumer, the producer 
receiving 32 per cent, of that value. In Massachusetts the 
winter rate of 37/4 cents a can, which the farmers want con- 
tinued through the summer, if applied to a can of 8/4 quarts, 
would make the price to the farmer 4% cents a quart. 

Of transportation, Charles H. Hood of H. P. Hood & Sons, 
Boston contractors, told the Railroad Commissioners that the 
cost from the receiving platform to the delivery platform in 
Charlestown was practically 6 cents a can. Isaac Whiting of D. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 317 

Whiting & Sons figured it at 5.84 cents, being 3.32 for freight 
and 2.52 for other costs. Mr. Hood said that it then cost about 1 
cent a quart for the driver of the delivery wagon, and another 
cent for the team. W. A. Graustein of the Boston Dairy Com- 
pany submitted to us figures showing that the cost of handling 
and delivering a quart of milk at retail, from the time it enters 
the bottling room in Boston until it reaches the consumer, is 3.2 
cents. This would make the cost of the quart of milk : — 

Cents. 

Paid to the farmer, 4.41 

Cost of transportation, 69 

Delivery to customer, 3.20 

8.30 

The Graustein figure includes nothing for profit, interest, 
supervision or losses. Mr. Graustein avers that other dealers 
say the total is too low, and that milk cannot be delivered at less 
than 3.7 cents a quart. 

The customer pays 9 cents a quart, so that, if these figures are 
anywhere near correct, the margin for profit is of the narrow- 
est. Few of the milk dealers with such routes as were customary 
fifteen or twenty years ago will be recalled as having made a 
fortune out of the business. Those who are prospering to-day 
owe their success to the magnitude of their dealings, turn- 
ing tiny profits on the single quarts into satisfactory aggre- 
gates. 

It will be noticed that under this schedule New England 
farmers get 49 per cent, of what the consumer pays, where Dr. 
Crowell reported the New York farmer as getting but 32 per 
cent, some years ago. In either case the cost of distribution 
appears unfortunately large. What are the reasons for it ? 

One reason is the duplication of effort. Eor instance, where 
several competitors have not parceled out the field, their delivery 
wagons cover the same ground. This is typical of what goes on 
all through the field of retail distribution. W. C. Brown, 
president of the New York Central lines, recently put the case 
forcefully : — 

I do not believe that combination among retail dealers has had any 
appreciable effect on prices. I do think, however, that on an average 



318 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

in all of our cities there are at least ten times as many middlemen or 
retail dealers as there should be. To illustrate: in a recent walk in 
New York City I counted twenty retail shops, where groceries, vege- 
tables and meat were sold, in one block. I live in an apartment-house 
which has about forty apartments, and from observation I should judge 
that at least twenty different grocers and butchers, each maintaining 
delivery wagons with drivers, deliver goods at this one apartment 
building, — not once, but several times each day. Nothing could be 
more wasteful or extravagant than this. Four good, up-to-date con- 
cerns, selling groceries, vegetables and meats, in each block, would 
be ample; and the rental charge, the cost of delivery, involving a large 
number of teams and men, the cost of purchase and collections from 
sales, the cost of supervision and administration, would be tremen- 
dously reduced. 

The same view was expressed by the Secretary of Agriculture 
in his annual report : — 

When twenty or more small shops divide the retail business within 
the area that could be served by one large shop, the expenses of the 
many shops for labor, horses, rent and other things that are in excess 
of what would be sufficient for the one shop must go into the retail 
prices of the meat sold. 

For instance, the trade census of 1905 reported in the city of 
Somerville 116 stores under the head of " groceries," 94 under 
"groceries and provisions" and 11 under " meats and pro- 
visions," with aggregate sales of $3,081,425 for the year, making 
an average of $13,943 each. Here were 221 food shops for 
69,272 persons, or 1 to every 74 families. 

Somerville buys much food in Boston. Let us see how it was 
in a more isolated city of the same size. Lawrence had 163 
" groceries," 105 " groceries and provisions," 38 " meats and 
provisions," with aggregate sales of $5,626,210, — an average 
of $18,373 each. Here were 306 food shops for 70,050 persons, 
or 1 to every 47 families. 

From the meat dealers who appeared before us and from 
other sources we have learned that profits have been paid on 
the beefsteak we eat to (1) the cattle grower, (2) the cattle 
buyer, (3) the packer, (4) the commission house, (5) sometimes 
a jobber, (6) the retailer; and costs have been paid to (1) 
the stock feeder, (2) the railroads, and (3) sometimes the cold- 
storage company. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 319 

E. D. Coburn, secretary of the Kansas Board of Agriculture, 
has figured from the government reports : — 

In 1900 the farmer was paid an average of lO 1 /^ cents a dozen for 
eggs. The wholesaler who bought them from the country merchants 
charged 19 cents, and the retailer charged the consumer 24 cents. 
Newspaper investigators during the winter asserted it to be a fact 
that at least during the latter part of 1909 the farmer was being paid 
28 cents per dozen, the wholesaler 38 and the retailer 45 cents per 
dozen. In east or west alike the consumer pays, on an average, almost 
twice what the producer receives for eggs. 

Figures printed in the report of the Industrial Commission 
showed that in nine markets in different parts of the country, 
of t the prices paid by consumers for potatoes, cabbages and 
onions, 46 per cent, was taken by the distributors and 54 per 
cent, reached the producers. As high as 80 and as low as 25 
per cent, was taken by the distributors. 

From the point of view of the farmer it is averred, further- 
more, that when he gets exceptionally low prices for his products 
the retailer is likely to sell in small quantities at about the same 
figures as in years of high farm prices, thus making it unprofit- 
able to send all the produce to market, and causing part of it to 
go to waste. 

The Parcels Post. — We asked Prof. T. K Carver of Harvard 
what remedies he could suggest for the defects in the distribu- 
tion processes, and he replied : — 

I think that the parcels post would do something in that direction, 
but not everything; that is, it would enable the producer and consumer 
to get together in some cases, order certain kinds of product directly 
and deliver it by mail. Small concentrated products — beef, butter 
and things of that kind — might be delivered in that way, if you take 
up the idea of the parcels post thoroughly, in a thorough-going man- 
ner, and really make it a distributing agency. 

Dr. Alexander E. Cance of the Massachusetts Agricultural 
College suggests the same remedy to us : — 

It would be perhaps the greatest encouragement that could be given 
to the small shipper, i.e., the country shipper of small parcels of 
produce. Were it possible, as in foreign countries, to forward packages 
of fish, meat, poultry or green produce up to 10 or 12 pounds in weight 



320 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

at reasonable rates, varying with the distance carried, directly to the 
home of the consumer, a large percentage of the extravagant costs 
of a middleman system of distribution would disappear. The oppo- 
nents of a parcels post are neither small producers nor the consuming 
householders. Granges, shippers' exchanges and agricultural associa- 
tions on the one hand, and consumers' leagues on the other, have been 
consistent, if feeble, advocates of the system. The opponents have been 
and are the retailers and the express companies. It is at this time, 
when the pinch of high prices is being keenly felt, that all possible 
pressure should be brought to bear to secure legislation that will pro- 
vide for a trial of the parcels post plan, which operates so successfully 
for the benefit of the housekeeper in other countries. Indirectly, it 
will without doubt react beneficially to reduce the prices of many arti- 
cles consumed or used in productive processes by the farmer; and 
it will thus reduce his living expenses, and the cost of production of 
the products he puts on the market. In principle, the economy of 
the plan is beyond peradventure ; the only question is as to economy 
and efficiency in details of operation. No doubt many changes must 
be made in any foreign system before it can be successfully adapted 
to our needs; but that a plan of administration can be mapped out 
after a fair trial, there is just as little doubt. The point that needs 
emphasis is, that the interests of the consumer of farm produce and 
of the farmer who produces it are one and the same, in as far as 
a cheaply distributed food supply is concerned. 

One member of the commission already applies the idea in 
the purchase of eggs, getting at regular intervals a case from a 
Maine farmer at less cost and with fresher eggs than if he 
bought at the shop, but of course having to use the express 
company, instead of the mails. In Switzerland he could use the 
mails at less expense. 

Dr. Crowell, in his report to the Industrial Commission, 
figured that 20 per cent, of the price paid by the Philadelphia 
consumer for Elgin butter went to the distributive expenses, — 
most probably divided about equally between transportation 
and commissions on the one hand, and profits of retailing on 
the other. If that is the case, 15 per cent, or so of the cost 
would be saved by direct dealing between dairyman and con- 
sumer, assuming no greater transportation cost, as might be the 
case with the parcels post. 

A Maine farmer recently told in a grange meeting how he had 
sent an order for some groceries to Chicago, paid the transporta- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 321 

tion charges to his home, and saved a tidy sum by the transaction. 
Among other things he bought was some sweet corn. This had 
been canned in Maine, shipped to Chicago, and reshipped to 
his local station via Bangor. For all that, it had then cost him 
materially less than he could have bought it for in the local 
market. The huge business built up by the mail-order houses 
attests the savings they make to consumers. Undoubtedly it is 
true that sometimes their patrons pay more than if they bought 
of the local dealer. Undoubtedly also the buyer sometimes does 
not get what he expects to get, — perhaps, indeed, what he 
ought to get. Nevertheless, these houses would not live and 
reach enormous proportions if they did not on the whole make 
an important saving to the consumer by cutting out the middle- 
man's expenses and profits. 

But the mail-order house is itself a middleman. Sooner or 
later we must do something toward dispensing with even the 
mail-order house. In Germany it is not only possible, but cus- 
tomary, for the consumer to buy directly from the producer. 
The monopoly of the express companies makes it impracticable 
to do that on a large scale here. 

The Commission Mens Exchange. — The commission man 
will be indispensable in the mechanism of distribution for a 
long time to come. As in every class of men, some are honest, 
some are impostors. The shippers' exchanges can much more 
easily discover the honest man, and make honesty a profitable 
policy. On the other hand, much of the disorder and chaos 
in the produce markets arises out of the intense competition 
and the every-man-for-himself policy of these receivers. Were 
a clearing house, for information only, organized, an exchange 
to which all carlot shipments of produce were promptly reported, 
and a central committee appointed to issue orders for consign- 
ments from the various sources of supply after going over the 
receipts for the day, glutted markets would be greatly reduced 
in numbers. With a shippers' exchange on the one hand co- 
operating with a commission men's exchange on the other, most 
of the present wastes would be eliminated. 

An exchange, somewhat on the principle of those organized 
for handling wheat and storable produce, is feasible and almost 
essential, if produce is to be moved without great loss. The same 



322 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

energy, capital and enterprise that put the distribution of wheat 
on a solid business basis and made it profitable, if directed to 
the building up and organization of the produce trade, would 
bring order out of chaos and raise profits to both grower and 
receiver. When every man is looking out for himself only, try- 
ing to make his personal receipts of produce as large as possible, 
when each one is ignorant of the consignments to the other, 
and consequently of the state of to-morrow's market, — over- 
shipments, cut-throat competition, glutted markets, ruinous 
prices and severe losses are bound to continue in the produce 
business. The shipper suffers most, of course, but indirectly it 
means higher cost of production and consequently higher prices 
to the consumer. 

3. Distributive Co-operation. 

The possibilities of co-operation as a means of eliminating 
the wastes in distribution and reducing the final cost of goods to 
consumers, and also increasing the purchasing power of wages 
and incomes, have hardly been touched in this country. In 
Great Britain distributive co-operation has been extensively 
developed, and with most successful results. The British 
co-operative societies did a total business last year of 
$538,000,000, on which the saving to members amounted to 
nearly $50,000,000. In the United States only occasional ex- 
periments have been made in this field. The lack of general and 
sustained interest in co-operative undertakings is doubtless due 
to the fact that the need of resort to this method of relief to 
consumers has not been felt so keenly as in countries in which 
the wage rate is lower and the pressure of expenditures on in- 
comes is greater. The advance of the cost of living is now 
directing attention to distributive co-operation. . 

It is difficult to determine the present extent of co-operative 
merchandising in Massachusetts or in the United States, owing 
to the general chaotic condition of the movement. There is no 
official organization, and little in the way of statistics as to its 
growth is available. In 1896 a central organization in charge 
of the movement, the Co-operative Union of America, was 
formed, with headquarters at Cambridge, but the organization 
was short-lived. At the present time provision is made in 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 323 

Massachusetts, in the business corporation law, passed in 1903, 
for the incorporation of co-operative societies, and since then 
they have been obliged to file official returns annually; but 
those returns are not required to show, and do not show, the 
principal facts needed for the investigation of the movement, 
namely, the amount of sales, the rate of dividends paid and 
the number of members. 

The history of the co-operative stores in Massachusetts and 
New England can be divided into three general periods. It had 
its beginning with the so-called Union Stores in New England 
from 1847 to 1859, which formed the first period. Seven hun- 
dred and sixty-nine stores were started in the whole country, of 
which 350 were in New England, mostly in Massachusetts. 
They had a total capital of $291,000 and a total annual trade of 
$2,000,000 ; but none of these now exist. The second period 
began in 1866, under the general direction of the Patrons of 
Husbandry. The movement though country-wide, was largely 
confined to New England; and, as in the former case, all of 
the stores established have been abandoned. 

The third wave of co-operative enthusiasm in the 70's 
was set in motion by the success of the Rochdale methods 
in England, and the activity of the Sovereigns of Industry dur- 
ing its brief existence from 1874 to 1880, and of the Knights 
of Labor from 1884 to 1888. The cardinal principles of the 
Rochdale stores were the sale of goods to members on a cash 
system at market prices, and the return of profits to members 
in the form of dividends proportioned to the amount of pur- 
chase, all purchasing members being stockholders, receiving 
interest on the capital invested. Though the movement suffered 
reverses through the death of the two fostering organizations, 
nevertheless in 1896 the total co-operative trade in New Eng- 
land — and most of this was in Massachusetts — was over twice 
as great as in 1886. In 1896 there were in Massachusetts 20 
active stores, with a total membership of 9,284, an average 
of 464 members per store, — two-thirds of the total membership, 
however, being in four large stores. The dividends paid by 15 
of the stores ranged from 3 to 10.5 per cent., with an average 
of 6.8 per cent. 

The available statistics, however, do not show any such in- 



324 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

crease in the next ten-year 'period, ending 1906. As has already 
been mentioned, it is difficult to obtain definite information, 
but the method of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor seems satis- 
factory. All known societies were written to for information, 
and after deducting the letters returned by the postmaster as 
" unclaimed," " out of business," etc., as well as those from 
which no replies were received, the remaining stores were con- 
sidered as the number of active stores in Massachusetts in 1906. 
In that year there were 23 active stores, with a membership 
total of 11,413 and an average membership of 496. The divi- 
dends of the 17 stores from which information was obtained 
ranged from 3.5 to 10 per cent., an average of 6.7 per cent. The 
net result of the ten-year period, therefore, was an increase of 
only 3 in the number of active stores, an increase in the total 
membership of 2,129, and in the average membership of 32. 
The average dividends decreased .3 per cent. The bulk of the 
membership in 1906 was in 3 large societies. 

When it is considered that distributive co-operation had its 
beginning in Massachusetts over fifty years ago, and that now, 
estimating on a basis of an average of 5 people per family, 
hardly more than 5 0,000 x people in Massachusetts, or about 1.5 
per cent, of the total population, are supplied by the co-operative 
stores, there seems little reason to expect that, unless new life 
is infused into the movement from some source not now visible, 
the system will ever become an economic factor of any impor- 
tance. Based though it is upon the attractive theory of bringing 
purchaser and consumer as near as may be together, and saving 
the large and growing expenses and middlemen's profits which 
now intervene and are paid by the consumer, it nevertheless 
appears to have failed signally to obtain any persistent growth. 
An examination into the individual societies which have per- 
ished may throw some light upon the causes of failure, and 
likewise furnish some conclusions as to the prospects for the 
future of the movement. 

In this connection it is first to be noted that during the years 



1 In this connection it must further be noted that the second largest store in 1906, and now 
the largest in Massachusetts, was the Harvard Co-operative Society in Cambridge, which con- 
fines its trade entirely to students of Harvard University, and therefore cannot be considered 
in estimating the number of people benefited by the distribution of family supplies by co-opera- 
tive stores. This would further reduce the number above mentioned. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 325 

1896-1906, according to the statistics secured by the Bureau of 
Statistics of Labor, there were 74 different co-operative as- 
sociations in operation in Massachusetts. Some of these were 
probably not distributive societies of the kind with which we 
are dealing, but it is definitely known that 19 distributive 
societies were dissolved during this period. Moreover, in most 
instances the life of the society was short, 3 having dissolved in 
the year in which they were organized, 7 within one year of 
organization, 1 within two years, 1 within three years and 3 
within four years. So far as any general inference can be 
drawn from these facts, they would appear to indicate lack of 
interest in the movement and an almost utter lack of the co- 
operative spirit. 

This lack of interest, moreover, is apparent in the older 
societies. In 1898 the West Warren Co-operative Association, 
organized in 1889, dissolved while having a membership of 202, 
" presumably on account of the lack of interest of the members." 
Similarly, the Co-operative Store Company, Silver Lake, Kings- 
ton, Mass., established in 1875, which was described by Dr. E. W. 
Bemis as the " longest successful American trial of the Rochdale 
plan," and the success of which was attributed by him to " what 
has been found more important than have been the Rochdale 
methods, — a co-operative spirit," was reduced from a member- 
ship of 123 in 1896 to only 17 in 1906; and in the year 1908 
the society filed no return with the Tax Commissioner, as re- 
quired by law, which may indicate its abandonment. The Fall 
River Workingmen's Co-operative Association, also, organized 
in 1867, has abandoned its merchandising business, though it 
has not formally dissolved ; and lack of interest may be further 
indicated by the failure of 8 of the 23 societies of 1906 to report 
to the Tax Commissioner in 1908, the last report issued. 

Another reason for the failure of the movement to grow may 
be inferred from the reasons for the failure of two of the oldest 
and largest of the Massachusetts stores. The largest store in 
Massachusetts in both 1896 and 1906 was the Arlington Co- 
operative Association of Lawrence; this city, by the way, in 
1896 at least had a larger proportion of members of co-operative 
societies than any other American city, approximately 36 per 
cent, of its population being supplied with merchandise by 



326 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

three stores, of which the Arlington Association was by far the 
largest. The Arlington Association was organized in 1884, 
and in 1906 had a membership of 3,609, an invested capital of 
$173,663, and total annual sales of $225,000, with an average 
dividend since its organization of about 7 per cent. Yet late 
in 1906 a deficit was caused by fraudulent management, which 
resulted in placing the Association in the hands of an assignee. 
Another old society, the Danvers Co-operative Union, organized 
in 1865, and the oldest co-operative store in the United States, 
failed in 1896 through the mismanagement of incompetent 
agents, and the failure was so disastrous as to leave the stock- 
holders only 25 per cent, of their investment. Similarly, the 
North Adams Co-operative Association was unable to pay divi- 
dends on either stock or purchases in 1906, owing to a loss of 
$3,000 in its coal department ; and the Swedish Mercantile Co- 
operative Company of Worcester showed a net loss in its store 
account in 1906 of $1,500. Both of these societies failed to file 
a report with the Tax Commissioner in 1908. 

These illustrations, taken from the largest and oldest and 
apparently the best-established associations, emphasize an inher- 
ent danger in the co-operative store, namely, loss through 
dishonest and incompetent managers. The system of electing a 
manager by vote of directors cannot fail at times to result in the 
choice of undesirable officials. Then, too, it must be borne in 
mind that the co-operative manager is not in the same position 
as the manager of a private store. He is working only on a 
salary, and hence has not the incentive to thrifty management 
furnished by the expectation of greater profits; and he is 
dealing with the money of other people, which introduces the 
other dangerous element of dishonesty. 

A further reason explaining lack of growth of co-operative 
stores may be found in the report of the auditor of the Swedish 
Mercantile Co-operative Company of Worcester, explaining the 
loss mentioned above. He says : " Present tremendous compe- 
tition makes imperative constant scrutiny for any saving in 
current expenses, large and small." It is extremely doubtful 
whether any co-operative store in a large city can furnish much 
cheaper goods than are now supplied by large and well-managed 
stores selling large quantities on small profits ; and when the 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 327 

additional danger resulting from unwise or fraudulent manage- 
ment, the loss from which always falls upon the members, is 
taken into account, it may well be questioned whether it is 
desirable to attempt the organization of co-operative stores in 
large cities. 

The system appears to work best where a considerable number 
of people are brought together by some common interest, such 
as common race, as illustrated by the numerous Swedish and 
German stores; or by common pursuit, as illustrated by the 
stores of workmen in factory districts, and more particularly 
by the Harvard Co-operative Union, a co-operative store of the 
students of Harvard University, which has been successful since 
its organization in 1882. When there is no such common bond 
naturally bringing a group of people together, it is extremely 
difficult to arouse a co-operative spirit; and no appreciable 
growth of co-operative merchandising may be looked for until 
such a spirit is developed by a systematic and aggressive spread- 
ing of the knowledge of the benefits resulting from co-operation. 

James Rhodes of Lawrence, the secretary of the Co-operative 
Union of America upon its organization in 1896, has since 
continued to perform the duties of that office, and he is referred 
to in the report of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor as a 
competent authority upon the subject. He has been con- 
sulted in the preparation of this report, and has very cour- 
teously furnished information to the commission. He closed 
his reply with the expression of the opinion that " the co- 
operative movement is an answer to the problem of high 
prices." He furnished no facts, however, indicating any recent 
growth of the movement in Massachusetts. In the early history 
of the movement the stores in Massachusetts were more numer- 
ous and better managed ; but from information obtained from 
Mr. Rhodes, as well as from other sources, it appears that in 
later years the movement has flourished in the western part of 
the United States. Mr. Rhodes gives as the foundation of his 
faith in the movement the success of co-operation in England; 
and cites one society of 9,000 members in which in one year 
there was a total saving on the necessities of life of $169,159. 
He also states that the British co-operative movement saved to 
the members, in the last fiscal year, $58,643,235 in a total trade 



328 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

of $537,753,270. Mr. Bhodes is familiar with the progress of 
the movement in Massachusetts, and the only inference that can 
be drawn from his failure to comment on it is the one already 
drawn from the facts secured from other sources, namely, 
that there has been no appreciable growth in recent years. 

Standardization of Product and Package. — The influence of 
the co-operative creamery in bringing about a standard quality 
of butter, and the advantages of such standardization, have been 
mentioned. There remains to emphasize the advantage in 
distributing produce of all sorts, — milk, eggs, poultry, fruit 
or vegetables, — of having the packages of the same size and 
quality. The pound of Elgin butter is a standard unit; every 
pound of that grade sold is like every other pound. The Oregon 
apples come in standard boxes, packed so that the same number 
of a certain grade of apples are in every box; every apple in 
the box is of the same size and quality. The New Jersey sweet 
potato growers are beginning to sort and grade their produce, 
so that a hamper or barrel of No. 1 Vineland Fancy will soon 
mean a certain weight of potatoes, of the same size, shape and 
quality in every instance. The Danish package of eggs is 
branded, and every package of any brand contains the same 
number of eggs, of the same size, weight, color and age. The 
greater facility with which such uniform packages and units can 
be handled is one great advantage; another is the assurance 
that the buyer has of the integrity of the produce. Dishonesty 
is reduced to a minimum; the last package is as good as 
the first; personal inspection is unnecessary before purchase; 
the sellers all along the line can be made responsible; and the 
quality of the product undergoes immediate, spontaneous im- 
provement. All these benefits will accrue- to the consumer. 
They will not be lower prices, but they will improve the prod- 
uct. Co-operative handling and packing is the surest and most 
effective means for bringing about these most desirable results. 

Nowhere are uniformity and accepted standards of measure- 
ment more necessary than in the perishable produce trade ; and 
nowhere, perhaps, is there less attention paid to these factors, 
the fruit trade alone excepted. The whole shipping business is 
chaotic, as one may judge from the boxes, pails, baskets, hampers 
and various-shaped receptacles of every conceivable size, in 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 329 

which berries, for example, reach many city markets. One of 
the first problems that the southern truckers met was the problem 
not of the twentieth man, but of the third, — the man who could 
not understand the necessity of clean, sound, uniform truck, 
honestly and carefully packed. The shippers' associations are 
educating this third man by rejecting all produce not up to 
grade, and by insisting on a uniform, guaranteed package of 
perfect goods. The near-by growers will learn also that stamped 
packages, bearing the name of the grower and the number or 
weight of contents, are desirable and economical from every 
point of view. The two agencies that bring this about are the 
organized growers and the associated commission men or prod- 
uce dealers. 

Factories to dispose of Inferior and Surplus Produce. — 
Small fruit growers, truckers and some general farmers, even 
when organized, are confronted with the almost insurmountable 
problem of handling the culls, seconds and surplus produce, — 
perfectly sound and good, perhaps, but not marketable. In 
certain localities in New Jersey, farmers' exchanges have 
established canning factories in connection with shipping 
agencies, to put up surplus strawberries, blackberries and rasp- 
berries, and to can sweet potatoes that are too small to be market- 
able. When prices are fair, the exchange ships the fruit ; when 
there is an oversupply, and berries are being dumped into the 
garbage wagons, the exchange buys them at a reasonable price 
and cans them. The canned sweet potatoes mean the utilization 
of a surplus stock that otherwise could not be disposed of, and 
represent an actual saving of the full market price to the 
grower. In other places sauerkraut factories, pickling tanks and 
fruit-canning establishments have been put in operation. There 
is no great profit in canning, even on a large scale ; the economy 
comes in the utilization of a surplus crop, that, unless so 
utilized, would go for almost nothing. 

A recent inquiry by the Bureau of Statistics of Labor with 
reference to industrial opportunities in the State brought the 
response from 51 towns that they had openings for canning fac- 
tories and creameries within their borders. The canning 
industries offer possibilities in Massachusetts along the lines 
suggested, in conjunction with organized agriculture. The for- 



330 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

mation of these factories should be encouraged in desirable 
districts, both by growers and boards of trade. It is probable 
that in certain sections of the State there is a place for the 
co-operative creamery. The establishment of co-operative milk 
depots in large cities calls for the associated creamery to dispose 
of surplus butter fat. There is no reason why it should not 
develop a skim-milk trade. Skim-milk is wholesome, and prop- 
erly treated would make an important addition to the dietary 
of many households. It is inexcusable to dump fresh milk into 
the sewer. 

Co-operative Storage Facilities at Shipping Points. — One 
great drawback to farmers who raise certain perishable products 
has been the necessity for the immediate disposition of harvested 
produce. Great quantities of berries, onions, potatoes, cabbage, 
squash, etc., come on the market at one time ; the price falls in 
the face of an overloaded market ; the farmer sells at a loss ; the 
speculator puts away the cheaply purchased surplus in cold 
storage; and the consumer pays for it at enhanced prices a few 
months later. A typical instance comes to mind. In a section 
devoted to late cabbage growing the farmers last autumn hauled 
their cabbages to the depot and loaded them on cars at the rate 
of 200 carloads a week, receiving $3.50 to $4.50 per ton for the 
finest produce. A storage company bought hundreds of tons, 
and sold them out of the warehouse for $25 a ton in January 
and February, 1910. A few of the larger growers also stored on 
their farms, at an expense of less than $5 a ton for loss and 
additional handling, and delivered their stock at their ship- 
ping depot for prices of $22 to $25 a ton. Cabbage can be 
sold for $5 per ton by the grower; allowing $5 for storage, 
it is easy to see the splendid margin $18 per ton gives over the 
fall price of $4.50. All this difference went to the speculator; 
the consumer reaped no benefit. The same phenomena have 
been repeated in that section at least for six years. A number 
of farmers' co-operative storages would increase the supply. The 
storage stock could be doled out through the season at an average 
price of $12 to $14, say, which would increase profits to grower 
and make possible decreased prices to the consumer. This is one 
instance. Storage for the preservation of produce to supply a 
future demand is legitimate, and there is no reason why the 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 331 

producers should not store their own produce, reap part of the 
reward that now goes to the speculator, and, by putting larger 
quantities regularly in the market, increase consumption and 
lower retail prices. The plan is feasible under good manage- 
ment, where there is an adequate supply of cold-storage produce. 
Central Distributing Agencies. — One obvious suggestion for 
reducing the margin between wholesale and retail prices is that 
there be a central agency for distributing produce, and that the 
consolidation of small retail stores be encouraged and com- 
mended. In one of our large cities, where there is a group of 
retail stores under one management, the proprietors have suc- 
ceeded in reducing the costs of operation very materially. 
Routes are laid out with a view to prevent reduplication and to 
complement each other. Produce is bought in large quantities 
in a way to save jobbers' profits, and is distributed both from the 
branch stores and from the central houses when the orders are 
large enough. Such a system of stores, as we have seen, runs on 
a smaller margin than smaller concerns, and part at least of the 
saving is passed on to the private consumer. Dr. Alexander E. 
Cance of the Massachusetts Agricultural College says : — 

At present the tendency toward consolidation and combination in 
the milk business is disclosing the elements of danger inherent in any 
monopolistic enterprise. While the handling, storing, refrigerating 
and distributing costs are greatly reduced by better administration and 
more economical use of large capital investments, there is always the 
temptation to manipulate selling prices to the consumer, and to charge 
all that the traffic will bear. The same tendency would doubtless ap- 
pear were the distribution of farm products centralized. In cities of 
the third and fourth classes the farmers' market and the house-to- 
house distribution by near-by vegetable growers and producers are 
safeguards against exorbitant prices. In the great cities legislative 
restriction and regulation must be relied on when competition fails 
to regulate. 

Both in the distribution of milk and other produce much is possible 
if the near-by producers can get together, redistrict the city to preclude 
reduplication of routes, and decide on uniformity of product. Stand- 
ardization is one great result of co-operative endeavor. It seems almost 
visionary to talk of getting together vegetable growers or local milk 
producers; but one can but reflect that few farmers' enterprises were 
more successful than the co-operative creamery, whose usefulness has 
been proved both in Massachusetts and the dairy States of the west. 



332 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Certain localities in New York have recently given up milk shipments 
and built co-operative creameries and cheese factories. Is it beyond 
reason to believe that co-operative milk depots, built and maintained 
by farmers and handled by well-paid experts, which will distribute 
efficiently and economically a uniform grade of pure milk and cream 
for which an organized association is responsible, will sooner or later 
be developed, at least in the smaller cities? In towns of less than 
25,000 population even the re-routeing of milk deliveries would effect 
great saving; and were the product standardized, so that one bottle of 
milk were just as desirable as any other bottle of the same grade, there 
would be little reason to continue the old wasteful method. 

To some degree this same co-operation between producers would effect 
many economies, and would assist materially not only in more eco- 
nomical distribution to the householder, but in the prevention of 
periodic seasons of glut and shortage. 

Regarding the practical possibilities of applying the co- 
operative principle to effect a reduction of the present high cost 
of living, Dr. Cance offers the following concrete suggestions : — 

The " Boston 1915 " organization has on foot a plan to establish a 
co-operative partnership, including the producer, the consumer and 
the transporter. It proposes to establish centers in farming towns 
within a radius of from 30 to 50 miles from Boston on good roads, 
from which to transport farm produce to a city market, the savings 
in transmission and delivery costs to be distributed between the three 
partners; also to establish marketing centers in the most congested 
parts of the city, securing where necessary a central distributing sta- 
tion, at which members of co-operative families can so far as possible 
call and take goods; and also to establish a new transportation agency, 
using the public highways and motor trucks. It plans to use the co- 
operative method in financing, producing and operating these trucks, 
and with proportionate sharing of profits with this department. It 
believes that the motor truck is available for quick transportation at 
costs below express or freight. The program is one of great interest, 
and it is much to be hoped that public spirit may be developed to the 
point of putting it into execution. 

4. Advertising. 
In the discussion of advertising as a possible factor in the 
increase of prices, it is important at the outset to distinguish 
between the legitimate advertising that performs a useful 
function by informing the public concerning the merits of com- 
modities, and the wildcat advertising that is designed to exploit 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 333 

consumers and overreach competitors. Prof. J. C. Schwab of 
Yale University, in an article published several years ago in 
the Yale " Keview," said : — 

Modern industrial conditions have radically changed the character 
of advertising and the part it plays in the modern economy of a peo- 
ple. To advertise is no longer strictly synonymous with to inform. 
Much of the advertising of to-day, especially in the daily newspapers, 
voices the rivalry of sellers of identical goods. Knowledge of the 
character and quality of these goods is nowadays obtained by the 
buying public through other means, and the advertisements are merely 
intended to draw the buyer from tradesman A to tradesman B, or 
vice versa. 

That such advertising is an economic waste, and contributes to 
the rise in prices and hence to the increase of the cost of living, 
cannot be questioned. Not only the novelties of commerce but 
also the necessities of life feel its baneful influence. One of 
the hopeful signs of the times is the tendency of progressive 
business men and their publicity experts to abandon the pirat- 
ical style of advertising, and to adopt saner methods. Properly 
directed advertising helps to enlarge the sale of goods, and 
thus to enable the producer to lower his prices, to the advan- 
tage of both himself and the buying public. 

The advertising in periodicals falls into two classes : maga- 
zine advertising, and newspaper advertising. The former is 
extensive in character; it is practised by the general advertiser 
through the medium of magazines that have a country-wide 
circulation. The latter is intensive ; it is followed by the retail 
advertiser through the medium of the local newspaper. It is 
in the latter kind of advertising that an element of economic 
waste is most conspicuous. 

The following figures, compiled from several dependable 
sources, give some idea of the immense periodical advertising 
in the United States. In 1889 the dailies numbered, out of 
21,269 periodicals, 2,128, or 10 per cent, of the whole number. 
Their circulation amounted to 12 per cent, of the total circu- 
lation of the entire country; in 1900 this had risen to 15 per 
cent, and in 1910 to 20 per cent. Advertising in dailies is 
chiefly local, and the cost of such advertising, because of its 



334 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



nature, is paid by the consumer. Sometimes there is an actual 
increase in the price of the article, while at other times the 
result is the purchase of cheaper articles, which must be re- 
placed, thus in the long run making the cost of living higher. 

In 1900, weekly papers represented almost 73 per cent, of 
the periodical circulation. At the present time this percentage 
is about the same, — perhaps a little lower. The weekly paper 
is to the rural districts what the daily is to the urban districts. 

In the ten years 1880-90 the circulation of monthly maga- 
zines increased 93 per cent., and now there are about 2,500, 
with an aggregate circulation of 25,100,000. This form of 
periodical is the chosen medium for a certain class of adver- 
tising, such as cereals, coffees, teas, cocoas and the like. Trade- 
marked clothing, shoes and also novelties find this medium 
the most profitable. To-day over 50 per cent, of the magazine 
space is devoted to advertising. The following table shows 
the relative amount of reading and advertising matter in six 
of the leading magazines of the country. The figures were 
obtained by examining the magazines for four different months, 
representing the four periods of advertising. 



Magazine. 


Number 

of Advertising 

Pages. 


Number of 
Advertisers. 


Number of 

Pages 

of Reading 

Matter. 


Scribner's, 

Harper's, 

World's Work, 

• 
Everybody's 

Munsey, 

Outlook, 


150 
100 
133 
162 
140 
146 


340 
280 
237 
324 
316 
296 


128 
140 
110 
142 
150 
119 



The rate per page in these publications varies from $250 
to $500. If $350 be taken as an average rate per page, then 
the total expenditure for advertising in these six periodicals 
alone may be estimated at approximately $3,500,000 annually. 

While advertising in periodicals is more extensive than in 
any other form, a great amount of advertising is done in other 
ways, through almanacs, calendars, hand-bills, circulars, cata- 
logues, booklets, window displays, street cars, billboards and 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 335 

demonstrations. All this outlay represents a charge on prices. 
The annual expenditure for advertising in the United States 
has been estimated by one expert as $250,000,000 for peri- 
odicals and an equal amount for other forms of advertising. 
According to the same authority, the total advertising expen- 
diture in the world is $2,000,000,000 a year. Such an 
enormous expense can be met in no other way than by addi- 
tions to prices of the articles advertised. 

With regard to the ratio of advertising expenditures to 
the value of the goods sold, Sidney A. Sherman has this to 
say: — 

There is no reliable answer. But, taking the value of the goods 
sold in the United States in 1890 at $10,000,000,000, and the total ex- 
penditure for advertising at $500,000,000, we get a rate of 5 per cent. 
This is not an overestimate. With many merchants 2^2 per cent, is 
regarded as an adequate amount to set aside for advertising. 

In many cases, however, the advertising tax absorbs a con- 
siderable percentage of the price of the article. A certain 
cereal food sells for 10 cents a package, or $3.60 for a case of 
36 packages. About $1 of the case price is due to the cost 
of advertising, or 28 per cent. The advertising bill adds from 
30 to 50 cent a barrel to the cost of flour, in some cases 60 
cents. In 1895 the Michigan Food Commissioner showed that 
one article that sold for 15 cents costs only one-third of a cent to 
make. In his testimony before the commission, William Whit- 
man, president of the American Woolen Manufacturers' As- 
sociation, stated concerning advertising outlay : — 

It costs as much to get the ordinary articles of the woolen manu- 
facturer into the hands of the consumer as the total cost to the manu- 
facturer. . . . Now, that seems pretty large. The cost of distributing 
has been increasing more rapidly than in other cases. The entire cost 
and the profits added thereto of the newspapers and magazines of the 
United States, including excessive cost of mailage, alleged excessive 
cost of mailage on magazines, is a cost added to the cost of distribution. 
How many hundreds of millions of dollars it amounts to I don't know. 
It may be a necessity, — I am not complaining of the newspapers or 
the magazines; but I believe it to be absolutely true that the entire 
cost of publishing and distributing the newspapers of the United 
States and the magazines is one of the contributory causes of the cost 



336 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

of merchandise, and is borne by the consumer. I hope some day some 
body, some authorized body, will make an investigation along this line. 

In the State of Massachusetts the total amount of adver- 
tised goods bought annually may be estimated roughly at 
$432,470,610. This figure was obtained on the basis of a 
per capita consumption of $130, which, according to the re- 
port of the United States Commissioner of Labor, 1903, may 
be computed as the approximate amount of individual ex- 
penditure for food, fuel, clothing, books and newspapers, amuse- 
ments, liquors and tobacco. If the expenditure for advertis- 
ing be taken as 5 per cent, of the total value of advertised 
commodities bought annually, as here estimated, then the an- 
nual advertising bill amounts to $21,623,530.50 in this State. 

It is denied in some quarters that expenditure for advertis- 
ing increases prices. This view is stated in a communication 
to this commission from the editor of a leading advertising 
journal, as follows : — 

At first glance, advertising is usually taken by the layman to repre- 
sent added cost, which the consumer pays through higher prices. In 
some few cases this may be so, but it is never so in well-organized 
modern establishments, where advertising is used as an efficient eco- 
nomic force. Advertising is distribution expense, and is supplanting 
the long-standing distribution expense of immense sales staffs and 
elaborate expense accounts. People naturally take the cost of traveling 
salesmen, branch organizations and all complicated and expensive ma- 
chinery of sales as a perfectly legitimate and necessary expense. So 
it has been, until advertising has supplanted it, largely for the very 
simple and mutually beneficial reason that it decreases distribution 
expense. Salesmen do not have to make one-third the number of trips 
they used to make, nor do they have to spend a lot of money for 
dinners, entertainment and other things, to persuade and even bribe 
dealers and jobbers to buy their brand of goods. They now use the 
economical means of printers' ink to talk directly to the consumer, 
so that they can demand, not beg or bribe the dealer to handle their 
goods. Furthermore, advertising is very rapidly resulting in cutting 
out the jobber and his middle profit. Thousands of manufacturers are 
now selling direct to dealers. If you take such famous examples as 
Ivory Soap and Baker's Chocolate, and measure the amount in quality 
of goods they give for their price, it can be readily shown how those 
who do not advertise do not give one bit more quantity or quality than 
those who advertise. As a matter of fact, it can be demonstrated by 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 337 

any householder going into a store. She will get a far better quality 
and quantity of canned goods and a score of other lines of goods for 
her money than if she buys the unadvertised brand, on which the dealer 
makes more profit, but which is considerably lower in quality. 

It is undoubtedly true that the development of advertising 
has eliminated or reduced certain other expenses of distribu- 
tion. It is also true that many of the advertised products 
are of excellent quality, adding appreciably to the health, 
convenience and comfort of existence. Moreover, in the case 
of an individual concern, advertising may by enlarging its 
sales make possible some reduction in prices. Undoubtedly 
advertising is a paying proposition, from the point of view of 
the individual business man, or it never could have been ex- 
tended to its present proportions. Advertising, furthermore, 
has given us, as a by-product, the penny newspaper and the 10- 
cent, now 15-cent, magazine. But to recognize all these benefits 
need not obscure the fact that the consumer does pay the bill 
for advertising, and that the bill has grown to enormous size 
in recent years. Competitive advertising has been vastly over- 
done. There is unquestionably a large element of waste in- 
volved in much of the present-day advertising. It is one of 
the many forms of waste in the distributive process, to which 
attention is directed in this report. The reduction of waste 
in this field would help to bring prices back to a lower level. 

5. Adulteration. 
The adulteration and the debasement of products result in giv- 
ing the consumer a poorer quality or smaller quantity for the 
price. The object of these practices is of course to reduce the ex- 
penses of production, and to obtain a larger return for a smaller 
equivalent of value. It. might be thought, accordingly, that in a 
period of advancing prices adulteration would be less prevalent 
than in a period of falling prices. With rising prices it might 
be reasoned that the producer, getting more and more for his 
product, would be under no temptation to practice adulteration. 
The facts, however, show the contrary to be true. During the 
recent period of advancing prices adulteration has been con- 
spicuously prevalent. Instead of advancing the prices of the 



338 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

products, manufacturers and dealers have in many instances 
lowered the quality or reduced the quantity of the goods offered 
at the same price. 

A study of the records of prosecutions by the Massachusetts 
State Board of Health under the food and drug act, since the 
beginning of the work in 1883, discloses the fact that adultera- 
tion has been keeping pace with the increase of prices of food 
products. Milk has increased in price more than 25 per cent, 
since 1881, and there have been more prosecutions for adul- 
terated milk than for all other articles of food together. Un- 
doubtedly, however, much of the increased prosecution may 
be attributed to a more general understanding of the dangers 
of bacterial infection, to new legislation and to stricter enforce- 
ment of existing laws. 

The ease with which milk may be adulterated makes the 
liability of the abuse in this case greater than in that of other 
food products. This adulteration has probably added very 
little directly to the cost of living, but the economic cost to the 
community by reason of illness and death resulting from impure 
milk is very great. The average typhoid death rate in cities 
of the United States is 35 per 100,000 ; of this, probably 25 per 
cent, is due to impure milk. Typhoid is only one of various 
contagious diseases which are spread by this medium of in- 
fection. 

It has been estimated that $100,000,000 worth of fraudulently 
prepared food is consumed in the United States each year. 
About 90 per cent, of this is officially classified as not prejudi- 
cial to health; the remaining 10 per cent, is set down as con- 
taining poisonous and otherwise noxious ingredients. Accord- 
ing to this estimate, we are annually consuming a total value 
of $10,000,000 in dangerous and deleterious food. Fraud has 
been officially detected in more than 3,000 samples of food prod- 
ucts and commodities of general use. 

The statistics of prosecutions conducted under the Massachu- 
setts food and drug act from 1883 to 1909 follow: — 



1910. 



HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 



339 



Prosecutions, 1883-1909. 





YEAR. 


Number of 1 Complaints entered 
in Court. 


Number 
of Con- 
victions. 




Food and 
Other Ar- 
ticles (not 
including 
Milk). 


Drugs. 


Milk. 


Totals. 


Fines 
imposed. 


1883, .... 


- 


5 4 


9 


8 


-i 


1884, . 








2 


1 


45 


48 


44 


-i 


1885, . 








502 


1 


68 


119 


103 


-i 


1886, . 








103 


- 


10 


20 


19 


-i 


1887, . 








30 


- 


34 


64 


60 


-i 


1888, . 








22 


- 


43 


65 


61 


S2.042.00 


1889, - 








74 


- 


66 


140 


124 


3,889.00 


1890, . 








78 


- 


24 


102 


96 


3,919.00 


1891, . 








96 


5 


49 


150 


135 


2,668.00 


1892, . 








52 


12 


72 


136 


123 


3,661.70 


1893, . 








26 


3 


67 


96 


92 


2,476.00 


1894, . 








14 


- 


76 


90 


77 


2,625.00 


1895, . 








13 


11 


68 


92 


86 


2,895.30 


1896, . 








7 


- 


68 


75 


74 


2,812.20 


1897, . 








13 


1 


51 


65 


64 


2,756.60 


1898, . 








10 


- 


54 


64 


62 


2,060.98 


1899, . 








19 


2 


26 


47 


45 


1,432.66 


1900, . 








45 


5 


44 


94 


89 


1,890.70 


1901, . 








30 


- 


65 


99 


90 


1,874.70 


1902, . 








25 


3 


48 


76 


74 


2,617.98 


1903, . 








34 


1 


44 


79 


70 


1,297.66 


1904, . 








6 


6 


50 


62 


57 


1,509.00 


1905, . 








209 


27 


77 


313 


275 


8,486.00 


1906, « 








177 


60 


171 


409 


383 


7,316.00 


1907, . 








123 


63 


147 


333 


290 


6,546.00 


1908, . 








76 


138 


219 


433 


386 


8,300.30 


1909, . 








72 


44 


180 


296 


267 


5,666.74 


1 Xo record kept. 


2 To May 1, 1886. 








3 


Four 


mon 


ths oi 


iiy. 


4 Fourtee 


l months, f 


rom Septen 


iber 30, 190 


5. 



The results of food and drug inspection in the State for 1909 
are given in the following table : — 



340 COST OF LIVING. [May, 



Food and Drug Inspection, 1909. 

Number of samples of milk examined, 4,611 

Number of samples above standard, 3,584 

Number of samples below standard, 1,027 

Number of samples of other kinds of food examined (not milk), 1,837 

Number of samples of good quality, 1,504 

Number of samples adulterated, as denned by the statutes, . 333 

Number of samples of drugs examined, 889 

Number of samples of good quality, 708 

Number of samples adulterated, as denned by the statutes, . 181 

Total examination of food and drugs, 7,337 

Total samples of good quality, . . . . . . 5,796 

Total samples not conforming to the statutes, .... 1,541 

6. Package Goods and Short Weights. 

The consumption of various food products specially prepared 
and distributed in packages of various sizes has increased enor- 
mously during the last decade. While these packed goods are 
undoubtedly wholesome, convenient and attractive, they never- 
theless as a rule cost more to the consumer than does the same 
quantity of food purchased in bulk. Indeed, the consumption of 
package goods under present conditions involves a large amount 
of waste in the expenditure of income. The habit makes for 
increasing comfort, pleasure and luxury in the household, but 
it adds heavily to the expense of living. 

The practice of buying package goods, instead of purchasing 
the same food products in bulk, involves a threefold addition to 
cost: (1) the packages are in many instances short in weight, 
and the purchaser often, if not usually, pays higher for the 
food value that he obtains than he would if he bought in bulk ; 
(2) he has to pay for the extra cost of fancy packing and of 
distribution in small quantities; (3) as most of the package 
foods are heavily advertised, the consumer has to pay also for 
this expense. It is not implied here that the consumption of 
package foods should be discontinued altogether, and the old 
method of bulk purchase adopted exclusively. Consumers, how- 
ever, should be made thoroughly acquainted with the fact that 
certain abuses have developed in connection with the purchase 
of the package foods, which reduce the amount of food value re- 
ceived for a given expenditure of money. 



1910.] HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 341 

In the ease of staple commodities, such as flour, the package 
habit has been carried to costly extremes. Formerly, house- 
wives bought flour in barrels; then the half-barrel came in: 
later, the size was cut to the quarter-barrel; further sub- 
divisions of eighths and sixteenths of a barrel followed ; the sale 
of flour in 5-pound packages is now general; and recently, as 
the climax of this process, the 2-pound package has appeared in 
some markets. The evolution of the flour package was com- 
mented upon by Bernard J. Kothwell, in his testimony before 
the commission, as follows : — 

The custom is gradually going out of having a barrel of flour in the 
house. When I was a boy, and the family did not have a barrel of flour 
in the house, they thought they were facing a calamity; but now it has 
gradually gone from the barrel to the quarter-barrel and the eighth- 
barrel and the sixteenth-barrel, until within a month we have had a call 
for flour to be packed hi 2-pound packages, and it is a fact that a large 
amount of flour is being sold to-day in 5-pound packages. That adds 
immensely to the cost of distribution all along the line. It adds to the 
cost of the manufacturer. Of course he must provide the extra pack- 
ages and the extra wrapping. It adds to the cost of distribution. 
To-day the grocer sends around to the housekeeper, and wants to 
know what her needs are, two or three times a week. She wants a 
sixteenth-barrel or an eighth-barrel of flour. The result is that he must 
make from eight to sixteen deliveries, not to mention the 5, 10 and 
2 pound packages which are being called for. He must care for his 
deliveries, besides the expense of distribution, and what is true in this 
case applies to all cereals. . . . Flour is packed automatically in bar- 
rels, and it is necessary for the packer, who stands there as the barrels 
come down, filled with apjDroxirnately 196 pounds, to put in two or 
three ounces or take out two or three ounces. It is rolled off by the 
cheapest form of labor we have, the head is put in in a minute, and 
that is the end of it. But when you come down to 2-pound bags, you 
must fasten up many separate packages ; and you can see that the labor 
cost is enormously increased, besides the danger of breaking in the 
carriage from the packer to the cars, to the warehouse: and the hand- 
ling the whole way through is very much more expensive. . . . There is 
a further trouble with the distributing to-day, and that is, that the 
average grocer, the very small grocer, where years ago he carried one 
brand of flour or possibly two, was an expert: he made up his mind 
as to which flour was the best, from his own experience, and he recom- 
mended that to his customers: while to-day the retail grocer is very little 
better than an automaton. — a sort of nickel-in-the-slot machine. A 
customer comes in and asks for this, that and the other, which he has 



342 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

seen advertised. It is passed over the counter without a word, and the 
result is that the small grocers will have ten or twelve different brands. 
They buy, if necessary, from ten or twelve different stores, and the 
cost of delivering that single barrel is just as much as it would be 
for delivering five. I am speaking now of the jobber and the retailer. 
All along the line there is this multiplicity of expense, for which the 
customer of course finally pays. 

It appears that when the packed food stuffs were first put 
upon the market, purchasers usually inquired concerning the 
weights or contents. They had been accustomed to buying by 
weight, and naturally investigated the quantity to be obtained in 
the packages. As the package habit became established, how- 
ever, customers ceased to take this precaution. This opened the 
way for a general reduction of the size of the packages by man- 
ufacturers. It is a well-known fact in the grocery trade that 
the sizes of package goods have in many instances been decreased. 
The purchaser, however, has not been informed concerning this 
reduction. As a significant instance, the case of a popular brand 
of prepared oats may be cited. This article, when placed upon 
the market a few years ago, was advertised as being sold in 2- 
pound packages. The package which is offered for sale to-day 
contains about 21 ounces. Owing to the fact that these matters 
receive little attention in this and other States, none of the orig- 
inal 2-pound cartons in which this brand of oats was formerly 
sold could be obtained ; but a package which was sold about six 
months ago was examined, and it was found to be considerably 
larger than the package now offered for sale. The old package 
has printed on it the statement, " This package contains 24 

ounces net oats, the best rolled oats or oatmeal made."' 

This package actually contained at time of sale 22% ounces. 
The new package contains no statement whatever as to the 
weight, but does state that " it is most economical." The total 
cost to consumers through this process of short weights is enor- 
mous. It has been estimated that 90 per cent, of the grocery 
products are received in package form to-day. 

The State Commissioner of Weights and Measures, Daniel 
C. Palmer, has investigated the sale of package goods for the in- 
formation of this commission. The detailed results of this in- 
vestigation are presented in Appendix L. It appears, for ex- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 343 

ample, that one brand of oats in packages costs 7.57 cents per 
pound, in bulk 3.3 cents per pound; bacon in glass jars 57.6 
cents per pound, sliced but unpacked 35 cents per pound; 
corn meal in packages 5.6 per pound, in bulk 2% cents per 
pound; graham crackers in packages 18 cents per pound, in 
bulk 15 cents per pound; cheese biscuit in packages 30 cents 
per pound, in bulk 20 cents per pound. Mr. Palmer in 
this connection visited a number of the cereal-manufacturing 
establishments, in order to determine whether there were any 
conditions in the process of packing or distributing which would 
justify the high prices of goods sold in packages, as compared 
with the same goods sold in bulk, and could find nothing to war- 
rant such an explanation. It may be remarked in passing 
that Mr. Palmer could discover no basis for the statement which 
is sometimes made, that manufacturers of packed goods send 
different sizes of packages to different sections of the country. 
He examined personally 370 packages of food stuffs sold in Chi- 
cago, and found that the packages were similar to those sold in 
the Massachusetts markets. Further results of Mr. Palmer's 
investigations, which cover not only the popular food products 
sold in packages, but also such staple commodities as flour, milk, 
coal and so on, are summarized in the following statement : — 

Flour. — Examinations made in the State show that in almost all 
the instances one-eighth-barrel sacks of flour do not contain 24V 2 
pounds; the weights found varied from 22 to a fraction less than 
24 x /2 pounds. The greater shortages found may have been due to 
evaporation or frequent handling of the packages; but it appears to 
be the practice among the milling trades to pack all flour in less than 
barrel quantities by gross weight, — that is, the weight of the con- 
tainer being included. In view of the fact that the weight of a barrel 
of flour is legally established in this and almost all other States as 
196 pounds, the one-eighth bag being 24V 2 pounds, this practice results 
in the consumer receiving short weight, or less than the amount of 
goods paid for. To illustrate : a customer purchases at retail a bag of 
flour which is usually marked as containing 24V 2 pounds, but which 
in reality does not contain 24y 2 pounds even when packed. When it 
is considered that some of the milling concerns pack from 200,000 to 
400,000 bags of flour per day, the gain to the miller from this source 
becomes readily apparent. Evidently the custom of packing gross 
weight in flour is a general one, and appears to be governed by the 
millers' organized trade body, known as the Millers' National Federa- 



344 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

tiou. The Ansted & Burk Company, merchant millers, Springfield, 0., 
in reply to inquiries regarding short-weight packages of their flour 
received in this State, write : — 

These sacks should have been 24% pounds, sack and all. We have never 
known of any one allowing for the weight of the sack. The laws in the 
southern States and Virginia are 24 pounds to a one-eighth sack; and we 
think this mistake occurred by our getting out a lot of flour for Virginia 
at the same time we got out your car, and our men got mixed in loading 
the different orders. The only way the packers can make a mistake now 
is to allow spilled flour to remain on the platform on the scales, — it will 
make the sack that much short. We have to watch this closely, and 
occasionally let a man go who will not obey orders. 



Bag Coal. — The price is over 40 per cent, higher than that for coal 
by the ton. The purchase price is 12 cents per bag of 25 pounds net. 
This makes the package price per ton $9.60. The bulk price per ton is 
$6.75, delivered. 

Bag Charcoal. — Net, 9 pounds ; purchase price, 12 cents ; package 
price per ton, $26.60; bulk price per ton, $16.66%. The loss here is 
over 50 per cent. Charcoal is sold to the family trade in Boston and 
vicinity at 50 cents per barrel. One barrel equals nine bags. The 
cost of a barrel purchased in bag lots is 84 cents, and the cost of a 
barrel purchased in barrel lots is 50 cents. These prices in both cases 
include delivery. 

Bag Coke. — Net, 25 pounds ; purchase price, 10 cents ; package 
price per ton, $8; bulk price per ton, $5.25, delivered. The loss is 
nearly 60 per cent. 

The following practices appear to exist in a large majority of trades 
where goods are sold by weight or measure, and in fact in some trades 
they have become so common that they are known as " trade customs." 
Much time and attention has been given to these matters by the State 
Department of Weights and Measures, but, owing to their general 
prevalence, it has been found exceedingly difficult to change these 
practices. 

First, the weight of wrappers, such as paper, cloth, twine, etc., in- 
cluded in the weight of goods and charged for at the rate of goods' 
price per pound. 

Second, goods charged for gross weight, the tare weight being in- 
cluded in the weight of the goods and estimated at the price of the 
commodity. 

Third, incorrect tare weights; instances where the actual tare weights 
of packages or containers are much greater than the tare weights given, 
and the purchaser is thereby compelled to pay for a greater net weight 
than is actually delivered. 

Inspections made of scales and measuring devices used in mills for 



1910.] HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 345 

determining the amount of goods manufactured, — the pay of the 
laborer being estimated by such determination, — showed that in some 
instances these devices were incorrect, which resulted in a loss to the 
laborer. Inspections of all of these devices should be made annually 
or of tener by the sealer of weights and measures of the city or town; 
but, owing to the inefficiency of many of the local departments, such 
inspections are made in but few instances. 

The following are a few additional food stuffs sold in package form 
at what appear to be exceedingly high prices : — 

Sliced dried beef, in packages of 4% ounces, 15 cents, which is 
equivalent to 49.1 cents per pound. 

Kindling wood sold in bundles. This is in every instance waste 
wood, and is sold at a price of approximately $18 to $20 per cord. 

Vinegar, molasses, pickles, olives, olive oil and similar goods, sold 
in bottles; raisins, rice, salt, tobacco, breakfast foods, crackers and 
similar goods, sold in packages; hams, bacon, pork loins and similar 
goods, sold at a weight which includes all wrappings. 

The variation in a 50-pound box of pork loins between the weight 
at which it is sold and the weight of the pork actually contained therein 
is sometimes as great as 3Vfe to 4 pounds. 

With a few exceptions, canned goods, such as tomatoes, peas, peaches, 
etc., are sold as No. 1, Xo. 2, Xo. 3 cans. These cans were formerly 
known as 1-pound, 2-pound, 3-pound, etc., cans, and are still commonly 
designated as such in the wholesale trade. These cans, however, have 
a capacity much less than the amount they are supposed to contain, 
and for this reason they have recently been designated as Xo. 1, Xo. 2, 
Xo. 3 cans, in order that there might be no violation of the national 
pure food laws. It appears to be impossible for a customer to buy 
canned goods intelligently in many instances, as there is no statement 
of the solid fruit or other matter which the cans contain, and in many 
instances there appears to be deception practised. 

Packages of picture cord actually sold as containing certain amounts, 
but which in reality contain much less. 

Liquid flasks, from 19 to 20 per cent, short. 

Ice cream, in paper boxes, from 15 to 20 per cent, short. In the usual 
method adopted in filling these boxes, ice cream is not placed in the 
corners ; this 23ractice, together with the fact that the box is short, results 
in the customer receiving from 20 to 30 per cent, less than the amount 
which he actually supposes that he is receiving. 

Silk ribbons, in rolls, are often found to be short measure. 

Poultry which has been kept in cold storage is sometimes offered for 
sale, and in the rush hours of trade is sometimes thawed by soaking in 
water. Attention is directed to a statement appearing on page 311 
of the thirty-ninth annual report of the Massachusetts State Board 
of Health : " Soaking drawn and undrawn chickens in water for the 
purpose of thawing causes absorption of 9 per cent, in weight." 



346 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

In defense of the package goods, it is contended that this 
method of bringing goods to the consumer is more convenient 
and sanitary than the method of bulk sale. The package keeps 
out the dust, dirt and germs that otherwise would get into the 
food through the handling by dealers. Undoubtedly the package 
method has a real advantage in its favor in the matter of clean- 
liness and neatness. The goods are usually prepared, also, in 
peculiarly attractive and appetizing style. The small grocery 
is often not notable for its sanitary and aesthetic appointments, 
and goods sold there under the conditions that existed in con- 
nection with the old practice of bulk purchase were often un- 
wholesome and dangerous to public health. A grocery store 
in the neighborhood of Boston is thus described in a letter sub- 
mitted to the commission : — 

The oatmeal or rolled oats, Indian meal, etc., are in open barrels just 
beneath shelves that serve as boulevards for countless rats and mice 
both day and night, as they journey to their " ratskeller." Dried cod- 
fish may be found, as in ye olden days, whole and on the skin, lying 
exposed to all the dust for weeks and sometimes seasons. When one 
enters the door a bell rings, which calls the attendant from the barn, 
where he has been unharnessing or brushing the horses. Accordingly 
as one article or another is desired, he plunges his unwashed hands 
into the pork or pickle barrel, cuts cheese or butter, often drawing 
kerosene and molasses in the mean time, and wiping the overflow on 
his coat sleeve or jumper. In summer no attempt is made to keep out 
flies, and much of the merchandise is open to them for food. The 
maple syrup bottles stand near by, and the keeper himself has been 
seen to take a swallow from them at different times, when his sweet 
tooth called. Prices are the same as in a well-kept store, both for 
articles in bulk and in packages. Here and in many other stores the 
question resolves itself into bulk vs. package; uncleanliness, liability to 
disease and fairly high prices vs. cleanliness, health and but small in- 
crease in cost. For those living in apartments where space is limited, 
where the kitchenette reigns or where provisions are used slowly, the 
package offers, in addition, economy of space and keeping qualities, as 
bulk cereals, meals and flours often become infested with weevils before 
they can be used. 

A local representative of one of the Chicago packing houses 
defends the sale of bacon in glass jars at high prices, as on the 
whole economical and advantageous to housekeepers : — 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 347 

When .the}' buy glass jar bacon they as a rule get 10 ounces of bacon, 
every particle of which is eatable, and they also get it put up in the 
most sanitary and decent way it can be packed, and it is wafer-sliced in 
such a way by machinery as to make it very delightful for people who 
do not ordinarily like bacon. Now, these glass jars of bacon are usually 
sold for 28 cents retail; this means that the bacon in them costs 2.8 
cents an ounce. Now, if one goes to the store and buys a whole bacon 
belly, as we say, one gets the bacon with the rind on and also the end 
nubbins, which are not usable except for boiling purposes; and if one 
were to take this piece of bacon bought at the store and put it in the 
same shape as the bacon they take out of the jar, it would shrink about 
25 per cent, in rind and undesirable end pieces. The wholesale price 
of Armour's Star Bacon in the piece is 24 cents a pound, the retailer's 
price would very likely be 28 or 30 cents a pound ; and, reduced to the 
shape of the bacon in the glass jar, having shrunk 25 per cent., this 
bacon bought in the piece would be 2.5 cents an ounce, or 40 cents a 
pound, as compared with 44 cents a pound in the glass. Now, this item 
of 44 cents a pound, or 4 cents over the other, looks large; but in 
reality the bacon in glass has other advantages; for instance, very few 
people can slice bacon properly at home, and sliced as it is in the glass 
jar it will go further and serve more people than sliced as it is at home. 
It is also undesirable to a great many to buy a large piece and have it 
lying around in the pantry, where of course it shrinks from l/ 9 to 1 per 
cent, in weight every day. When you add to this the inconvenience of 
slicing, and the fact that few people have sharp knives, it is very easy 
to see why these glass jars are very popular among housekeepers. 

It is further maintained that packing by machinery is much 
cheaper than packing by hand. If this be so, it should be pos- 
sible to sell the package foods more cheaply, other things being 
equal, than goods sold in bulk in the usual manner. A dealer 
states that the price of package goods at retail should be cheaper 
than for the same quantity sold in bulk, for the reason that the 
manufacturers can pack these goods mechanically for a fraction 
of what it would cost the retailer. Another retailer, who has 
made inquiry concerning methods of packing, states that nearly 
all of the large manufacturers use machinery which enables one 
girl to weigh and seal from 15,000 to 16,000 packages a day. 
From the point of view of the retail grocer, the sale of package 
goods is a saving in the necessary labor of packing, the cost of 
bags and twine, while at the same time giving his store a more 
attractive appearance. It appears, from the high range of 
prices of package goods, that any economies that the system 



348 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

may bring to manufacturer and retailer have not been shared 
with the purchasing public in the form of reduced prices. 

Various remedies have been suggested for the abuses that 
have crept into the system of retailing goods in packages. One 
measure of protection which each consumer can apply for 
himself is to make inquiry concerning the weight and quantity of 
goods in packages, and to check up the results by weighing and 
measuring the goods at home. Home weighing would bring to 
light any shortage or deceit that might be practised, and would 
show the comparative economy of the purchase of goods in pack- 
age or in bulk. It has been pointed out, also, by Henry D. 
Hubbard, secretary of the National Bureau of Standards, that 
excellent work could be done by women's committees on honest 
weights and measures. He advises such committees to visit the 
mayor and the town sealer, if such an officer exists, to study 
the inspection service and to examine the written records of the 
service. Such action by a vigilance committee of householders 
would have a wholesome influence on dealers and officials alike. 

These measures, helpful as they may be to a certain extent, 
are quite inadequate to protect the public against short weight. 
Effective legislation for protection is needed, requiring that the 
net contents of all goods in packages shall be stated on the label 
in units of weight, measure or count. The buyer has a right to 
know the quantity, as well as the price, of goods that he pur- 
chases. The only way in which this information can be fur- 
nished to him under guarantee of accuracy is through such a 
statutory requirement. Legislation of this character is ad- 
vocated by the National Bureau of Standards and by State de- 
partments of weights and measures. The New York Superin- 
tendent of Weights and Measures says : — 

There are sufficient data before me to warrant New Yorkers in uniting 
in a demand on Congress and the Legislature to enact immediately laws 
compelling manufacturers, packers and dealers to mark the weight, 
measure and numerical count of their goods, or risk rigorous legal pun- 
ishment. Cracker and cereal packages have shrunken, and are still 
purchased in the belief that they contain what they formerly did. These 
package goods are enormously more expensive for the ultimate consumer 
than the same quality of bulk goods. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 349 

The Massachusetts Commissioner of Weights and Measures 
strongly favors such legislation for the protection of purchasers. 
The proposed legislation is vigorously opposed by certain man- 
ufacturers. The original draft of the national pure food law 
contained a requirement that the net weight or measure of con- 
tents should appear on packages containing food products. The 
requirement was stricken from the bill through the opposition of 
the manufacturing interests affected, and the national law as it 
now stands provides merely that if any statement does appear on 
the outside of the. package, it shall give the net weight or measure 
of the contents, without requiring such statement to be made. 
The usual argument of the opponents of net weight legislation is 
that the manufacturer cannot possibly make sure that all pack- 
ages shall contain exactly the same weight or amount, and that 
many goods lose in weight after packing. This argument is not 
conclusive. The law could allow a reasonable shrinkage, say 
of 5 per cent., and should provide merely that the weight at time 
of packing, not at the time of purchasing, is to be stated on the 
cover. There can be no valid objection on the part of honest 
manufacturers to a properly qualified requirement of this kind. 
Opposition to such an enactment reflects upon the motives of the 
protesting parties. 

The further question arises, whether, if net weight legislation 
is to be enacted, it should be State or national. State legislation 
has been declared to be undesirable, if not impracticable, since, if 
thoroughly enforced, it would " build a wall " around the partic- 
ular State adopting the net weight requirement. The implica- 
tion is that manufacturers would boycott a State imposing the net 
weight requirement. This objection is too absurd to consider 
seriously. South Dakota already has a net weight law in force. 
The consequence has been that packages sold in that State have 
increased considerably in weight, with no increase in price, with 
the result that the people of that State receive more for their 
money than the residents of other parts of the country. State 
legislation on this subject would cause no unreasonable disturb- 
ance of the business of manufacturers of packed goods, as it 
would merely compel them to give honest weight, — at least in 
one section of the country. 



350 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

It is desirable, in the opinion of this commission, that a law 
shonld be enacted in this State requiring packages containing 
food products to be labelled distinctly with a statement giving 
the net contents, in terms of weight, measure or numerical 
count, of goods when they were packed. This requirement 
is demanded for the protection of the consumer, in order to 
give him the opportunity of ascertaining the actual price per 
pound of the goods that he buys in packages. Undoubtedly 
the ideal method of regulating the sale of package goods is 
through national legislation. The fact that a very large pro- 
portion of the food stuffs is packed in different States, and 
that this business is of an interstate character, makes national 
rather than State legislation the most expedient and effective 
policy. The enactment of such a law as is proposed in the State 
of Massachusetts would set the pace, and furnish an example for 
the adoption of similar legislation by other States and by the 
national government. 

D. THE TARIFF. 

In the resolve creating this commission, the Legislature di- 
rected it to inquire into " the cost of living in this Common- 
wealth, and to inquire into the direct and indirect effect of the 
tariff upon wages, income and cost of living." The brevity of 
the time given to the commission seemed to warrant the belief 
that the Legislature did not contemplate a wide and far-reaching 
inquiry into all the effects of the tariff, but rather had in mind 
its effect in relation to the advance in commodities that has been 
going on for thirteen years, and in relation to the necessities of 
life in which that advance has been most marked. It was evi- 
dent that we must confine ourselves for the most part to the 
working of the tariff on food, without trying to disclose those 
more involved relations that result in the main from the applica- 
tion of duties to the materials or products of manufacture. 

A natural and common method of determining the effect of a 
tariff on the cost of living is to make comparison between prices 
in different countries. That has its use, but it is full of dangers 
and uncertainties. 

It is doubtless the case that articles bearing the same name are 
at the present time bringing different prices in Boston, London, 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 351 

Springfield and Montreal. It does not follow that they are 
identical articles. 

It is doubtless the case that articles are now selling at differ- 
ent retail prices in Massachusetts, Canada and England, when 
their wholesale prices are the same; hut, because costs of dis- 
tribution vary, — rents, wages, the accustomed percentage of 
retail profit, — inferences about the effect of the tariff are 
vitiated. 

The use of comparisons for argumentative purposes, unless 
they are known to be of identical articles, sold under identical 
conditions, usually proves little. Nevertheless, such compari- 
sons are constantly made, and it is important to show their fre- 
quent fallacy and futility. 

In the first place, prices within the same country have a wide 
range. They differ between the cities and the towns of the 
same State ; they differ between a city and its suburbs, and even 
between the suburbs of the same city, as anybody knows who 
has successively lived in Everett and Brookline, Chelsea and 
Newton. To illustrate, last year as low as 14 cents a pound 
was paid in Philadelphia for chicken for ships of the navy, and 
as high as 25 cents in Pensacola and Seattle. Ice ran from 15 
cents a hundredweight in New Orleans to 40 cents in Pensacola 
and New London. Potatoes ran from 1 cent a pound in San 
Francisco to 2% cents in Charleston and 3 cents in Key West. 
Milk was 18 cents a gallon at Mare Island, 30 cents in Norfolk, 
60 cents in Key West. Eresh beef that cost 7.3 cents a pound 
in Boston cost 8.9 cents in Portsmouth and 9.5 cents in Newport, 
within a few hours of each other. 

The Canadian " Labour Gazette " for March printed retail 
prices of 35 staple articles in forty-six Canadian towns, from 
ocean to ocean. Omitting two-quality quotations, here are some 
of the variations: sirloin steak, from 12 cents a pound in St. 
Hyacinthe to 20 cents in Halifax and Vancouver ; medium chuck 
roast, from 8 cents a pound in Toronto to 15 cents in Brandon 
and Nanaimo; veal forequarter, from 7 cents a pound in Monc- 
ton, Montreal and Maisonneuve to 15 cents in Sydney, Ottawa 
and Nanaimo; fresh roasting pork, from 12% cents a pound in 
Ottawa to 20 cents in Victoria; bacon, best smoked, from 17 
cents a pound in Halifax to 30 cents in Brandon and Vancouver ; 



352 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

new-laid eggs, from 27 cents a dozen in Chatham to 50 cents in 
Winnipeg and four western places; milk, from 5 cents a quart 
in Charlottetown to 12 cents in Victoria, with the price 10 
cents in Sydney, Quebec and five other places ; butter, creamery 
prints, in Ontario alone from 25 cents a pound in four places 
to 35 cents in two ; bread, from 3% cents a pound in Edmonton 
and Calgary and 3% cents in Belleville, Kingston and Chatham 
to 5 cents in Sherbrooke, Hull, Ottawa and four other places 
and to 6% cents in three far western places ; rice, " B " brand, 
from 4 cents a pound in Three Elvers to 10 cents in Peter- 
borough and Winnipeg; potatoes, in Ontario alone, from 50 
cents a bushel in Belleville and Kingston to 85 cents in Wood- 
stock and Windsor, 90 cents in Niagara Falls and Chatham 
and $1.25 in Port Arthur. 

Could anything better illustrate the hopelessness of trying to 
draw conclusions from retail price figures reported by different 
observers in different places ? 

The table presents some puzzles. Why should milk be 10 
cents a quart in Quebec, 8 cents in Montreal, 5-6 cents in two 
Ontario places, 6 cents in eight others, 7 cents in five others, 8 
cents in two, 9 cents in one and 10 cents in one ? Why should 
bread be less than 4 cents a pound in ten places in eastern Can- 
ada, 4 and under 5 cents in sixteen places, 5 cents in -five places ? 
Why should salt pork sell for 15 cents in seven Ontario places, 
16 cents in four, 17 cents in two, 18 cents in three, with one 
place reporting 11—12 cents and another 20 cents ? 

Averages show up more satisfactorily. Of meat quotations, 
72, in eight places of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and 
New Brunswick, average 14.3 ; 70, in eight places of Quebec, 
14.4; 160, in nineteen places of Ontario, 15.2;. 88, in eleven 
places of Manitoba and the far west, 17.3 Of eggs, milk, butter 
and cheese quotations, 53, in the Nova Scotia, Prince Edward 
Island and New Brunswick places, average 23.9; 55, in the 
Quebec places, 24.8; 137, in the Ontario places, 24.4; and 68, 
in the western places, 30.6. Adding these together, the show- 
ing is : — 

Eastern Provinces, 38.2 

Quebec, 39.2 

Ontario, 39.6 

Western Provinces, 47.9 



1910.] HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 353 

The chances are that these are not far from the real ratios 
of the cost of animal food in different parts of Canada in the 
larger towns. 

Such figures furnish the best proof possible that food costs 
are of most importance as relative matters, with income as the 
other factor in the ratio. Thousands of Canadians are moving 
from eastern Canada to western Canada, in the face of the fact 
that food will cost them there 25 per cent, more, because they 
can increase their income by more than that percentage. In the 
same way many thousands have come from Quebec and the 
Provinces to Xew England, because any excess in the expense of 
living here is more than offset by the excess of possible earnings. 

Also notice that there is no tariff wall between eastern and 
western Canada, and yet the difference between food costs 
is many times greater than it is between the Provinces and 
Xew England. 

1. C AX ADA AXD THE TTxTTED STATES. 

We reached the conclusion that satisfactory price comparisons, 
beyond criticism, could be made only by experts, familiar with 
kinds, classes and qualities of goods, and that they ought 
to be men above suspicion of partisan bias. Accordingly, we 
decided to ask the Boston Fruit and Produce Exchange to name 
a man who could speak with authority on the subject of meats 
and produce ; and to ask officers of the three grocers' associations, 
the Executive Association of Wholesale Grocers of Xew Eng- 
land, the Boston Wholesale Grocers' Association, and the Boston 
Retail Grocers' Association, to name a man who could speak 
with authority in regard to groceries. The president of the 
Fruit and Produce Exchange, Arthur M. Cumings, consented to 
act for that body. Mr. Cumings is actively engaged in business 
in the Boston market, and is recognized as an expert in his occu- 
pation. The grocers' associations agreed upon Robert S. Wason, 
of the house of Wason k Co., long-established wholesale grocers. 

We would acknowledge the hearty co-operation of these 
gentlemen, and express appreciation of the sacrifices made by 
them in doing a public service. 

It was decided that these expert observers should start out with 
a Republican and a Democratic member of the commission, as a 



354 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

still further precaution against the charge of bias. The four 
went first to Detroit and Windsor, whence the members of the 
commission proceeded to Toronto and Ottawa and the experts 
went to Montreal, St. John and Bangor. It was believed that 
food prices in Boston and Montreal might be fairly compared; 
and Bangor was taken as a typical New England city in the 
class with St. John. The two commissioners investigated chiefly 
clothing conditions. At Toronto they went together through 
the foremost department store of Canada; by the courtesy of 
the editor of the Toronto " News, " J. S. Willison, whose kind- 
ness they would acknowledge, they came into possession of a loug 
and valuable series of articles on the cost of living, recently 
printed in his paper; and they had an instructive conference 
with J. W. Flavelle, of the Wm. Davies Company, head of the 
packing industry of Canada. At Ottawa they profited by con- 
ferences with Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King, Minister of Labour, 
and the Deputy Minister, F. A. Acland, who have been engaged 
on a thorough investigation of this very subject, by reason of the 
equal interest that attaches to it in Canada. We would acknowl- 
edge their generous aid on the occasion of this visit and in other 
particulars. Consul-General Foster at Ottawa and Consul Chil- 
ton at Toronto also gave valuable assistance. 

The most widely quoted price comparison made of late has 
been between prices in Detroit, Mich., and Windsor, Ont, sepa- 
rated by half a mile of real river and a more or less insubstan- 
tial tariff wall, for it does not appear that the officers of the cus- 
toms completely succeed in levying the duties. 

Detroit is a city of 300,000 inhabitants, where rents and wages 
are of urban standard, and the shopkeepers make city profits. 

Windsor is a town of less than 10,000 inhabitants, with the 
main street of a country village straggling along the river front, 
with rents, wages and profits on the rural scale. 

Averaging Mr. Cumings's figures on meats and provisions as 
well as may be, it would seem that the Windsor total is 1.8 per 
cent, less than that of Detroit. On the other hand, Mr. Wason's 
grocery figures average 7.5 per cent, higher for Windsor than 
for Detroit. 

In the comparison between Boston and Montreal, Mr. Cum- 
ings's figures for meat and provisions show the Boston average 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 355 

about 10 per cent, higher. Mr. Wason's figures on groceries 
show Montreal about 4 per cent, higher. 

In the comparison between Bangor and St. John, Mr. Cum- 
ings's figures show Bangor about 13 per cent, higher. Mr. Wa- 
son's figures on groceries show St. John about 8 per cent, higher. 

In the matter of groceries, it is important to note Mr. Wason's 
conclusion, that " the consumer gets, on the average, fully as 
much value, more variety and in some cases a better article for 
his money in the United States than in Canada." 

The reports of Mr. Cumings and Mr. Wason may be found 
in Appendix F. 

Consul-General Foster of Ottawa told a member of the com- 
mission that friends who had come there from Washington found 
that, though the items of their food bills were smaller, yet in 
the course of a season they had spent just as much for food. 

Consul Chilton of Toronto told the commissioners that upon 
removal there from Washington he found the living expenses of 
his family larger. 

Consul Dill of Port Hope, Ont., writing in comment on news- 
paper comparisons, said, in September, 1909 : — 

Taking into account all the lines covered, the cost of household neces- 
sities is considerably higher in Toronto than in Buffalo. 

Consul Fleming of Yarmouth, N". S., writes : — 

Living in Yarmouth is little if any cheaper than in cities of like size 
in the United States, with the exception of house rent. Farmers and 
gardeners generally send their produce to Boston, with which there is 
almost daily steamship communication, and that market generally fixes 
prices of food stuffs here. Clothing is no cheaper here than in the 
United States. Woolens are a trifle cheaper, but cottons are dearer. 
Many persons go from here to Boston to buy their winter and spring 
goods, and frankly say that for an outlay of $50 in that city, including 
the cost of the trip, they can get more than for the same amount ex- 
pended in Yarmouth. 

Beef and Meat Products. — It is frequently stated that meat 
costs the consumer in the United States more than in Canada or 
in England. Figures are cited and conclusions drawn for dis- 
cussion of the tariff, criticism of trusts, or other argumentative 
purposes. For example, figures have been recently published 



356 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

in the " Commoner/' " La Follette's," the " American Maga- 
zine/' and in many newspapers, indicating that meat costs 
much more in Windsor, Ont., than in Detroit, Mich. It has 
been said that beef, the cheapest cut, sells for 6% cents a pound 
in Windsor, 10 cents in Detroit; mess pork, 13 cents a pound in 
Windsor, 20 cents in Detroit ; dressed turkeys, 20 cents a pound 
in Windsor, 25 cents in Detroit; dressed chickens, 11 cents a 
pound in Windsor, 15 cents in Detroit. The report of Mr. 
Cumings shows no more difference there in meat prices than 
would be expected between a city and a country store, — no more 
than the differences between Boston suburbs. Poultry was 
found virtually the same, where there was any. The trouble 
with the 20-cent turkeys in Windsor was that there were no 
turkeys there at all. 

The agent of an American packing house sells refined lard in 
Toronto, after shipping it from Chicago and paying 2 cents a 
pound duty, at the same prices secured by Canadian manufac- 
turers. The Windsor-Detroit comparisons said that prime lard 
sold at 13 cents a pound in Detroit, 11 cents in Windsor. This 
agent said that he would buy all the lard offered in Windsor 
or Detroit at either price. Mr. Cumings found that as a matter 
of fact lard was selling in Detroit at 18 cents a pound and in 
Windsor at 20 cents. About the same time it was telegraphed to 
a Boston paper that lard was selling in Detroit at 16 cents a 
pound and in Windsor at from 14 to 15 cents. In the year 
ending June 30, 1909, we exported to Canada lard valued at 
$1,238,567. 

In studying Mr. Cumings's report, it should be emphasized 
that he found nowhere a quality of beef to match that used in 
Boston. Testimony is unanimous that Boston demands the 
best beef to be had. That is one reason why Boston meat prices 
are higher not only than those in Canada, but also than those in 
cities outside of New England. 

James Martin Miller has recently declared in the New York 
" World " that " meat is selling at retail in England at from 20 
to 30 per cent, cheaper than in the United States." At almost 
the same time George L. McCarthy, publisher of the " National 
Provisioner," was testifying to the Senate committee : " The 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 357 

prices in London are always higher than they are in New York." 
And in his paper he said : — 

The reports indicate that, so far as wholesale prices of American 
meats are concerned, they are no cheaper than Chicago prices for the 
same grades. As for retail prices, a comparison of the " National Pro- 
visioned " Chicago retail market reports of the same date as the gov- 
ernment reports from England show that the same class of meats 
were a whole lot cheaper in Chicago than in the British shops where 
they were offered for sale. And this in spite of the fact that in this 
country the cheaper cuts are largely a loss to the butcher, because of 
lack of demand for them, while in England, as the reports state, there 
is always a good demand for the cheaper portions of the carcass, and 
the retailer can thus afford to sell the choicer cuts, and indeed all cuts, 
at a lower figure. Yet the reports and comparisons indicate that 
American beef is costlier to the consumer in England than in Chicago. 

The " Commercial Record," London, March 25, 1910, 
said : — 

Beef arrivals included 100 tons Scotch, 126 Liverpool sides, 450 
American refrigerated hindquarters and 650 forequarters, also 2,900 
Argentine hindquarters and forequarters. Beef, English, quoted 3s. 
lid. to 4s. 2d.; Scotch, 4s. 2d. to 4s. 8d.; American, 3s. to 4s. 6d.; 
Argentine, 2s. 8d. to 3s. 8d. ; Australian, 2s. 5d. to 2s. 4d. 

These quotations are by the stone, which in dressed beef in 
England is 8 pounds. So American beef was bringing at that 
time from 72 cents to $1.08 a stone, or from 9 to 13/4 cents a 
pound. In the same week its average in Boston was 10.79 
cents a pound. 

Supplies for the Massachusetts training ship " Ranger " were 
bought during 1909, in Boston on wholesale contracts, similar 
to hotel contracts, running for some six months ; in foreign ports, 
on competitive bids in each port to supply provisions for the 
ship's company — about 125 persons — to last for varying short 
periods. Beef was bought in Boston for 9 cents a pound; in 
Europe, in eight ports, at prices ranging from 11.5 cents a pound 
in Nice and Genoa to 16.22 cents in Gravesend, Eng. Fresh 
pork loins, Boston, 12 cents a pound; Europe, from 14.2 cents 
in Stockholm to 22.78 cents in Copenhagen. 



358 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Dr. Arthur Shadwell says in his book, " Industrial Effi- 
ciency " : — 

The meat in America is of the same quality as " foreign " meat in 
England; it is fairly good meat, but not equal to home-grown. The 
difference is greater with mutton than with beef; American mutton 
is very inferior, and not so good as the foreign (New Zealand) mutton 
sold in England. The best English mutton is a thing apart, not to 
be obtained anywhere else. . . . What I actually found was that meat 
which is 4d. or 5d. in England is 6d. or Sd. in corresponding towns in 
America; meat which is 7d. or 8d. in England is lOd. or lid. in 
America; meat which is lOd. or lid. in England is not to be had at 
all in America. 

Even if he compared qualities accurately and gave due weight 
to differences in the manner of cutting meat, which is difficult 
for one not in the trade to do, it is possible that he did not appre- 
ciate the differences in costs of retailing, which will be illus- 
trated when we come to the matter of bread. 

S. H. Cowan of Fort Worth, Tex., recognized as one of the 
best-informed men in the country on cattle growing, told the 
Senate committee that for cattle for export the cattle men 
" generally get better prices, because the cattle exported are 
the best quality of cattle ; they are not the heaviest cattle, 
but they are bought by expert buyers, who know cattle that 
will stand a trip and will weigh around 1,100 or 1,200 pounds." 
To the question, " The stock men do not export to Liverpool to 
sell at a lower price than they would get in Chicago ? " he re- 
plied : — 

Not intentionally, but at the same time during the past year and a 
half many men have lost money in buying export cattle; they come in 
competition with Argentine beef, and Argentine beef is to-day cutting 
us out of the market in England, — the only market we have. We do 
not ship a pound of fresh beef to any other country except Belgium 
on the European continent. 

P. L. Hughes of the Cudahy Packing Company testified to 
our commission that his house had stopped exporting beef, be- 
cause " we couldn't make it pay, on account of the competition 
of Argentina and other places." Edward D. Whitford of John 
P. Squire & Co., testified, in the matter of hog products : — 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 359 

We are obliged to get practically the same price on exports as we 
do locally. Sometimes you get more abroad, sometimes here. I feel 
very certain that if you take the average for the year of our prices 
here in New England and our export prices abroad, they will run 
about the same. We are not trying to hold the European market; we 
very much prefer to sell here. 

Fred Clark of the North Packing Company testified that about 
35 per cent, of their business, hog products, is export. He also 
denied that the American packer sells his surplus abroad less 
than here. To the question, " Can you buy American hog prod- 
ucts in Liverpool cheaper than you can in Boston ? " he an- 
swered : — 

You can't do that on the average, according to my experience. 
There are times when you can, — when there is a glut there and they 
don't bring the ham back here. When you once get ham there you 
can't bring it back; the principal reason is that a great many of our 
hams that go over there are rolled in borax. That is against the United 
States law, to roll hams in borax, on this side; you couldn't bring them 
back and sell them. 



Taking all these facts and considerations into account, it 
seems to us unwarranted to draw any inferences as to the effect 
of either the tariff or the trusts, from comparisons between the 
price of meat in this and other countries. Canada and the 
United States are disposing abroad of a surplus steadily grow- 
ing smaller and already insignificant in comparison with home 
consumption. They are competing with each other in the 
English market on an even footing, and each is at a disadvantage 
in comparison with Argentina and Australasia, which seem des- 
tined to absorb the export meat trade of the world. 

Exports of cattle from the United States for the three years 
ending June 30, 190*7-09, have been as follows: 1907, 
401,583 pounds; 1908, 277,036 pounds; 1909, 184,957 pounds. 
See Appendix J. 

It may have taken last year 300,000 cattle to furnish the 
beef exported, or say 500,000 for all the meat we sent abroad, 
on the hoof or otherwise. The estimate of the number of cattle 
in the country January 1, 1910, was 69,080,000. It appears 
that we annually slaughter about 13,000,000, so that, if we are 



360 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

sending only 1 in every 26 abroad, the export trade can have only 
slight significance in its relation to prices at home. 

The exports from Argentina to the United Kingdom have gone 
up as onrs have gone down, — from 12,128,256 pounds of fresh 
beef, no live cattle being sent, in 1898 to 187,630,352 pounds 
in 1904 and 485,640,848 pounds in 1909. Australasia sent 
96,985,840 pounds in 1909, having nearly quadrupled its con- 
tribution since 1903. 

Canada in 1909 had 7,234,084 cattle — exclusive of British 
Columbia. The number fell off by 313,498 from 1908. Her 
exports, too, are shrinking. Mr. Pat Coughlin, one of the big 
exporters of Montreal, was quoted in February as saying that 
the business is practically dead, and that the greater part of the 
exporting firms had been operating at a loss during the past six 
months. He said that in January, 1909, 8,400 cattle were 
shipped to Europe from St. John; that in January, 1910, not 
more than 700 were shipped ; and that ten cattle ships, with an 
average capacity of 600, had left St. John since the opening of 
the winter season without a single head of cattle on board. The 
drop in exports of Canadian cattle through Boston has not been 
so large, but nevertheless has been great. In 1909, shipments 
were 25,519 ; in the first quarter of 1910, 4,591. Of domestic 
cattle, 81,282 were exported from Boston to Europe in 1909 ; 
16,775 in the first quarter of 1910. 

Murdo MacKenzie of Trinidad, Col., one of the leading cattle 
men of the west, tells the Senate committee that last year he 
sold in Canada, presumably for export, cattle he had sent there 
as two-year-olds, instead of bringing them back to Chicago. He 
says that grass-fed beef in Canada is a great deal better than 
grass-fed beef here, because the grass is better. He thinks that 
the provinces of the Canadian northwest are the best grass coun- 
try in the world. To-day, however, it is clear that Canada 
barely supplies her own beef. There is estimated to have been 
a decrease of 240,000 cattle in Ontario in three years. 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



361 





Exports of Canada to Great Britain. 






Year. Cattle. 


Meats 
(Value). 


Year. 


Cattle. 


Meats 
(Value). 


1904 

1905, .... 
1906 


148,301 
159,078 
163,994 


$15,705,102 
16,250,932 
13,615,444 


1907 

1908 

1909 


149,340 
124,015 
113,583 


$9,797,345 
12,157,331 



Corresponding figures for meats in 1909 have not been ob- 
tained, but the total value of " animal produce " exported in 
1909 is given as $53,040,391, against $53,019,843 in 1908. 

The swine in the United States decreased 11.7 per cent, from 
1908 to 1909; in Canada, 13.6 per cent. The sheep in the 
United States increased 2 per cent. ;. in Canada, decreased 4.4 
per cent. Our live swine in 1909 were valued at $436,603,000. 
We exported hog products to the value of about $100,000,000, 
but if the cost of manufacturing is taken into account, the part 
of our hog products going abroad is not relatively great, when 
it is remembered that we are supposed to have 38.5 per cent, 
of all the swine in the world and only one-tenth of the meat- 
eating population. 

The " Grocer's Gazette, " London, said, March 19, 1910: — 

Hams. — Long cuts extremely scarce, and fully 5s. to 7s. dearer, 
while short cuts continue in limited supply, and quotations are advanced 
about 3s. 

In an editorial it was said : — 

The price of bacon, which, in common with the price of butter and 
other commodities handled by the trade, is a matter of grave concern, 
is having the effect of attracting increased attention to the scarcity of 
hogs and its causes. . . . The number of pigs returned (in Great 
Britain) in 1909 was 2,380,887, as compared with 2,823,482 in 1908, 
showing a decline of 15.7 per cent. The decrease was generally at- 
tributed by the collecting officers to the enhanced price of corn, offal 
and other feeding stuffs, although it was stated by some that the 
increased home demand for pig products tempted owners to slaughter 
more rapidly, and thus to reduce the number at the time of the enumera- 
tion. 



Consul Albert Halstead of Birmingham furnishes the follow- 
ing abstract of an article from an English technical publication, 



362 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



giving the receipts of American bacon in England and its aver- 
age prices during the years 1893-1909 : — 



Year. 


Weekly 
Receipts 
(Boxes). 


Average 

Price 
(Per 112 
Pounds). 


Year. 


Weekly- 
Receipts 
(Boxes). 


Average 

Price 
(Per 112 
Pounds). 


1893 
1894 
1895 
1896 
1897 
1898 
1899 
1900 
1901 










14,000 
16,000 
17,500 
18,000 
23,000 
23,000 
23,000 
24,000 
25,000 


$13.87 
10.58 
9.00 
7.45 
7.96 
7.94 
7.96 
10.26 
11.19 


1902 
1903 
1904 
1905 
1906 
1907 
1908 
1909 










20,000 
18,500 
18,500 
20,000 
18,500 
18,500 
18,500 
13,000 


$13.62 
14.45 
10.78 
10.46 
12.65 
12.43 
11.43 
14.98 



A box weighs about 530 pounds, and may be reckoned to con- 
tain the bacon of five hogs. In 1910 the average number of re- 
ceipts since January 1 has been 9,000 boxes a week, which is 
only half the weekly receipts for the seventeen years and 4,000 
boxes less than in 1909. 

As we raise about 75 per cent, of the corn crop of the world 
and 38.5 per cent, of the world's supply of hogs, it is reasonable 
to expect a renewal of heavy exports of hog products, with the 
corn crops and the increase in number of swine that the prevail- 
ing high prices will stimulate. 

The first Australian or New Zealand frozen mutton was mar- 
keted in New York in August, 1909, when 250 carcasses were 
brought in by an English agent as an experiment, with success, 
the market at the time being very high, thus permitting the pay- 
ment of the duty of 1% cents a pound and sale at a profit. In 
the middle of April of this year, a further consignment of 2,160 
carcasses was received, with 2,500 more on the way. The local 
dealers paid 12-12% cents a pound for the frozen sheep, as 
against about 14 cents for city-dressed sheep; and about 14 1 /2 
cents a pound for the frozen lambs, against 16-17 cents for fresh 
city-dressed lambs. There has been no importation of frozen 
Australian beef, so far as is known to the " National Pro- 
visioned " The mutton is said to stand the freezing, the long 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 363 

journey and the handling better than beef would stand it. It 
is said by the " National Provisioner " that if properly thawed 
out the Australian mutton will compare very favorably with 
fresh-killed mutton. 

Our exports of sheep or mutton have never amounted to 
much ; in fact, they constitute an inappreciable part of the total 
volume. Argentina, New Zealand and Australia, in the order 
named, supply the world's surplus of mutton. Consul-General 
R. M. Bartleman of Buenos Aires reports that the frozen-lamb 
export trade of Argentina, Chile and Uruguay has greatly in- 
creased during the last three years, with these totals of car- 
casses : — 

1907, 130,915 

1908, 438,077 

1909, 757,788 

The tariff on cattle less than a year old is $1 per head ; more 
than a year old and valued at more than $14, 27M> per cent, ad 
valorem. On swine it is $1.50 per head. On sheep a year old 
or more it is $1.50 per head ; less than a year old, $0.75 per head. 
On fresh beef, veal, mutton, lamb and pork it is 1/4 cents per 
pound ; on bacon and hams, 4 cents a pound ; on lard, 1% cents 
per pound ; on meats, prepared or preserved, " not specially pro- 
vided for, " 25 per cent, ad valorem; on live poultry, 3 cents 
per pound ; dead, 5 cents per pound. The Payne bill reduced 
the tariff on beef, veal, pork and lard 25 per cent. ; on bacon and 
ham, 20 per cent. 

Provisions, Vegetables, etc. — Exports of eggs from Canada 
during the years ending March 31, 1904 and 1909, were: — 



Year. 


Total Exports 
(Dozens). 


To 

Great Britain 

(Dozens). 


To the 

United States 

(Dozens). 


1904 

1909, 


5,780,316 
558,132 


5,679,048 
445,152 


30,387 
57,483 



In 1904 Canada imported 972,249 dozen eggs; and in 1909, 
1,146,041 dozen; which shows that its home product falls short 
of supplying its home demands. The Canadian imports of eggs 



364 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

from the United States during the same fiscal years were as 
follows: 1904, 936,917 dozen; 1909, 1,102,254 dozen; showing 
that nearly all its foreign egg supply is drawn from the United 
States. 

The Detroit- Windsor comparisons, to which reference has 
been made, alleged that eggs were selling in Detroit at 42 cents 
a dozen when they were selling in Windsor at 34 cents. Mr. 
Cumings found the difference 7 cents, instead of 8. The tariff 
is 5 cents, and doubtless the other 2 cents was due to the normal 
difference between the conditions of a city and a village market. 
Mr. Cumings found egg prices in Boston and Montreal pre- 
cisely the same. St. John was charging 1 cent more than 
Bangor. 

Eggs vary so in price with the seasons that it is hard to com- 
pare them in different parts of the world, but there is little doubt 
that North America is not the cheapest egg region. For the 
ships of the navy, eggs were bought within the United States last 
year at prices ranging from 22 cents a dozen in Washington to 
34 cents in Charleston ; and abroad as low as 5 cents a dozen in 
Chefoo and 6 cents in Shanghai, China. The " Ranger " got 
them at 19.5 a dozen in England and 18.4 cents in Italy, but paid 
27.8 cents in France, at Nice. 

In passing, it is worth noting that where $3 a ton was paid 
in Boston for ice for the " Ranger " last year, it cost in Europe 
from $4.02 in Amsterdam to $28.85 in Nice. 

The Detroit- Windsor comparisons gave 28 cents a pound as 
the price of the best butter in Windsor and 36 cents in Detroit. 
Mr. Cumings found print butter selling at the same price in 
the two places, and creamery 1 cent higher in Detroit. Boston 
and Bangor appear to run from 1 to 3 cents higher than Mont- 
real and St. John, respectively. . 

Charles H. Farnsworth testified to the commission that to 
the best of his knowledge no Canadian butter had come into the 
Boston market since the duties were placed on it. He had never 
seen a tub. 

The tariff on butter and cheese is 6 cents a pound. On fresh 
milk it is 2 cents a gallon and on cream 5 cents a gallon. 
Whether by accident or otherwise, this new rate on cream, set 
by the Payne bill, has made the duty so insignificant that it has 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 365 

taken the supplies from most of the creameries along the border, 
we were told, so that many of them have been forced* to close, 
nearly all the cream coming to the States. 

The commission asked Preston V. Chapin of Chapin Brothers 
how near New England comes to raising her own vegetables, and 
he answered : — 

I should think possibly 50 per cent. ; I shouldn't think any more than 
that, unless it was on potatoes. Of course in the matter of our early 
potatoes the south supplies our market in June, July and August, but 
outside of that the potatoes are supplied by New England. It is very 
rare in the past few years that we have had to go out of New Eng- 
land for potatoes. Once in a while we will go to York State for a 
few, but not very often. New Jersey and Virginia are the great pro- 
ducing States for early potatoes, and New York State for cabbage. 
Turnips we import from Canada about altogether. We very rarely 
get any of the other vegetables from Canada. Once in a great many 
years we get potatoes, but not very many. Last year they imported 
a large quantity of potatoes not only from Canada but from Europe. 
As to apples, but very few come here, on account of the high rate of 
duty. We get turnips from Canada, because they raise a better quality. 
The land is better adapted to this crop, or else they know better how 
to do it. And another thing, they raise them cheaper than we do. Our 
farmers won't work so hard as they will on the other side of the line. 

W. H. Blanchard told the committee that turnips will not do 
well except in cool climates and also on comparatively new land. 

It is very difficult to raise a decent turnip here in New England, 
unless you go into the northern part. In Nova Scotia they do very 
well; it is one of their best crops. They cannot raise corn or anything 
of that kind, and consequently they have restricted themselves to rais- 
ing turnips, and their turnips are good. 

Mr. Cumings found half a dozen of the common vegetables 
averaging to cost 17 per cent, more in Windsor than in Detroit ; 
"but the Montreal and St. John prices mostly range lower than 
in Boston and Bangor. 

It is to be noticed that a tariff on foods prevents each coun- 
try from mitigating the damage of a short crop when the other 
is plentifully supplied. Also, it prevents getting the full benefit 
of seasonal advantages. Green vegetables and small fruits ma- 
ture later in Canada, of course. The tariffs prevent Canada 



366 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

from profiting by our early crops, and prevent us from profiting 
by Canada's late crops. Retail fruit and vegetable dealers of 
Winnipeg bave recently forwarded to Sir Wilfrid Laurier a 
petition asking for tbe cancellation of dues on fruit and vege- 
tables imported into Canada. The petition asks that the duty be 
canceled only during seasons of the year during which the goods 
imported cannot be bought in Canada. Strawberries, peaches, 
cucumbers, watermelons, peanuts, tomatoes and cherries are 
among those that the local merchants want admitted free. 

Our tariff on standard vegetables is, per bushel: onions, 40 
cents ; green peas, 25 cents ; potatoes, 25 cents. On beets it is 
25 per cent, ad valorem; on cabbages, 2 cents each; " not speci- 
fied, " 25 per cent, ad valorem. On apples, cherries, pears, 
plums, quinces and peaches it is 25 cents a bushel; on berries, 1 
cent a quart. 

Fish. — Mr. Cumings reported to the commission orally that 
in St. John he found an excellent fish market, with fresh-fish 
prices higher than in Boston. He found a poor selection of 
fish in Montreal. The Canadian tariff on fish has confined the 
supply of the St. Lawrence cities for the most part to the fisheries 
of the Provinces. 

Boston and Gloucester are the great fish markets of the east. 
Our tariff, of 1 cent a pound on mackerel, halibut and salmon, 
and % of a cent a pound on other fresh fish, has little effect on 
the market price. Salt fish is of course another question. We 
shall content ourselves with giving the testimony of Marshall F. 
Blanchard, one of the leading fish dealers of the State : — 

Q. Will you tell us what in your opinion the tariff on fish should 
be? A. There is now a tariff of 1 cent a pound on halibut, mackerel 
and salmon. I think if the tariff was lowered ^ of a cent it wouldn't 
do any harm. The duty on salmon doesn't protect anybody here. We 
don't catch salmon east here. The salmon that we get previous to the 
salmon season in New Brunswick are caught on the west coast, the 
Columbia River and out through there ; but the duty doesn't affect them 
at all, because in the east here during the salmon season, when the New 
Brunswick salmon come here, the demand is wholly for eastern salmon, 
and there is scarcely any demand for the western salmon to perhaps the 
middle of May, and after the middle of August, then we begin to 
handle the western salmon. About the duty on mackerel, I don't think 
it makes any material difference in regard to the price to the consumer. 
You take mackerel from Nova Scotia, for instance. I have reference 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 367 

to the mackerel shipped from Nova Scotia, from Yarmouth and Hali- 
fax. They are shipped to commission men in Boston, and they sell 
those mackerel at the highest prices they can get, regardless of any 
tariff. Possibly I am in favor of reciprocity with Canada. I will go 
that far. 

Q. Are those tariff mackerel sold in competition with the George's 
mackerel? A. It doesn't make any difference. They are usually 
shipped here. There are very few caught on this coast, and they are 
shipped here occasionally. Years ago it would make some difference, 
but not at the present time. 

Q. What percentage of mackerel consumption in this country is in- 
troduced under a tariff, caught directly outside of the three-mile limit? 
A. You have reference to mackerel landed here? 

Q. Yes. A. In 1900 there were approximately 54,552 barrels. I 
have the exact figures here, and I will give them to you. In 1900 
there were landed in Boston 54,565 barrels of mackerel fresh; in 1905, 
49,912, — you see there are over 5,000 less; and in 1909, 46,439,— 
8,000 barrels less, and the demand increasing all the time. 

Q. That is not imported, — that is their own catch? A. That is 
their own catch; I haven't the data on the importations. 

Q. Is the importation large ? A. Last year it was very small. Eight, 
ten or twelve years ago nearly every steamer from Yarmouth would have 
anywhere from 1,000 to 1,500 barrels. 

Q. Does Canada have a tariff on fish? A. Yes; she placed a tariff 
on fish before we did here, and shut the Boston market right out from 
Montreal. We had a good trade in Canada previous to that. That 
shut the Boston market right out of Montreal, and they get most of 
their supply down from Halifax. 

Wheat and Bread. — In the years of the decade ending with 
1880 we averaged to export 27.79 per cent, of our wheat crop 
— including flour ; 1881-90, 27 per cent. ; 1891-1900, 35.75 per 
cent. ; 1901-09, 20.41 per cent. For the last six years the aver- 
age has been 17.18 per cent. This means that we are steadily 
approaching the point where we shall raise barely enough wheat 
to make our own bread. 'Eliminating the factor of variations in 
crop, it looks as if we were lessening our exports by about 2 per 
cent, a year, so that it is not at all impossible that we shall be 
in the world's market for wheat in the course of half a dozen 
years, for last year we exported only 12.5 per cent, of our 
crop. 

Meanwhile, the wheat crop of Canada has gone up from 
7,201,519 bushels in 1889 to 166,744,000 bushels in 1909, ours 



368 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



in 1909 being 737,189,000. Last year our population was es- 
timated at 88,566,034; Canada's at slightly more than 7,000,- 
000. Of course when we begin buying wheat it will be from 
Canada. 

The tariff on wheat is 25 cents a bushel ; on wheat flour, 25 
per cent, ad valorem. It was not changed by the Payne bill. 

Hon. Sydney Fisher, Canadian Minister of Agriculture, in a 
recent address before the Canadian Club of Ottawa gave fig- 
ures as to bread prices, in cents, per 100 ounces, which he kindly 
verifies in a letter to the commission, as follows : — 



Cities. 


Wholesale 
(Cents). 


Retail 
(Cents.) 


Per Cent. 

Margin. 


Chicago, 


28.57 


35.71 


25.3 


Montreal, 


32.50 


40.00 


23.4 


Toronto, 


25.00 


31.25 


25.0 


Ottawa 


28.12 


34.37 


22.2 


Liverpool, 


15.62 


18.75 


20.0 


London, . 


17.18 


20.31 


18.2 



The information for Chicago was procured through Brad- 
street's Commercial Agency, but in the other cities it was ob- 
tained by officers of the department on the spot. Mr. Fisher 
writes to us : — 



It is difficult to make a fair comparison of prices of bread in dif- 
ferent cities, because of the fact that it is the weight of the loaf and 
not the price which is affected by its quality. All loaves are sold at 
the same price, but the better the quality, the lighter the loaf. In 
the above figures a considerable difference is shown in the price of 
bread in Montreal and Toronto. The Montreal loaf which is referred 
to is supposed to weigh 20 ounces, but as a matter of fact the over-run 
is sometimes 8 ounces. In Ottawa the actual weight of the loaf usually 
corresponds with the stamped weight. Whether this is the case in 
Chicago, Liverpool and London, I do not know. 

It is undoubtedly a fact that bread is sold more cheaply in the old 
country than it is on this side, and I believe that the baker in Great 
Britain works on a much smaller margin than the baker in Canada or 
in the United States. The margin of the Liverpool baker appears to 
be so small as to preclude any chance of profit, but it must be remem- 
bered that the volume of his business is very great. For instance, one 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 369 

firm of bakers in Liverpool has a capital of $500,000, owns 57 shops, 
from which it sells bread wholesale and retail, and also delivers from 
house to house by hand barrow. Another firm has 75 shops, another 
40 and another 35. 

The weight variation in Montreal, of which Mr. Fisher 
speaks, doubtless accounts for the report of Mr. Wason, — that 
he found prices there which figure out 100 ounces for from 
2-4.32 to 40 cents. Mr. Wason's prices figure 35.71 cents for 
Detroit, 23.81 cents for Windsor, 38.46 cents for Bangor, 32 
cents for St. John and 35.71 to 36.15 cents for Boston. 

It will be seen that Boston, Detroit and Chicago are virtually 
on a level in bread prices ; Ottawa is a trifle lower ; St. John 
next; Toronto next; and Windsor (with town conditions) the 
lowest. Bangor is higher and Montreal highest, at its maxi- 
mum. 

Bread was bought for the Massachusetts training ship " Ban- 
ger " in Boston in 1909 for 4 cents a pound. Prices paid abroad 
were: Gravesend, Eng., 6.5 cents a pound; Amsterdam, 4 
cents; Antwerp, 3.5 cents; Gibraltar, 5 cents; Nice, 3.8 cents. 
In Copenhagen, Stockholm and Genoa the report says it was 
too high to buy. 

Secretary of the Navy Meyer reports that in 1909 bread was 
bought for ships of the navy in Boston at 3.1 cents a pound; 
Nice, 4 cents ; Gibraltar, 5.7 cents ; Naples, 5 cents. 

Judgments on the quality of bread appear to vary with tastes. 
Dr. Shadwell, in " Industrial Efficiency," comments upon a 
table of comparative prices in England and the United States 
as follows : — 

Looking at the columns given above as they stand, any one would 
gather the impression that with one exception there is not very much 
difference. The exception is the high price of baked bread in America; 
it is double the price of the same quality (made of American flour) in 
England. There is no doubt about the fact, which I have corroborated 
for myself in a number of towns in different States. I suppose the 
reason is that baker's bread is something of a luxury, and home-baking 
the rule, as it still is in Scotland, in some towns in the north of England, 
and in rural districts generally. 

Special Agent Henry Studniczka says, in a recent report 
on British labor conditions and cost of living : — ■ 



370 , COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Special attention lias been given to the cost of bread. Over 20 large 
retail bakeries were visited, and the same class of bread that can be 
purchased in Chicago, St. Louis and New Orleans, at 5 cents a pound 
costs here 4 cents a pound in all the retail stores. In the laboring 
districts, however, a 4-pound loaf is sold for 12 cents. This bread 
compares well with the second day's stale bread which wholesale 
bakers in American cities sell for 2% cents per pound. It is a good, 
substantial food, but not the best obtainable. 

On the other hand, President Bo-thwell of the Boston Cham- 
ber of Commerce, a flour merchant, said to us : — 

There is no more comparison between a loaf of Boston bread and a 
loaf of London bread than there is between chalk and cheese. There is 
practically no export trade of high-grade American flour in Europe 
now. To the best of my recollection, we have not sold a barrel or a 
pound of high-grade flour in Europe since last July. Of course there 
are grades, low grades, we have to dispose of somewhere, and they are 
sold across the water, but there is no special demand for them at home. 
It has no bearing whatever on the cost of our bread here. 

Part of Mr. RothwelPs testimony may well be quoted ver- 
batim : — 

Another important matter that would regulate speculation, and also 
the price, would be the removal of the tariff. I can see no reason 
at all and no justification for a tariff in the case of our own com- 
modity, — wheat. There is no reason why wheat cannot be raised as 
profitably and cheaply in the United States as it can be near the 
Canadian border. The fact, which I think can be shown, is that the 
actual cost of raising wheat in Canada, if you eliminate the interest 
on the lands, the actual cost of production, is probably higher than in 
the United States. A year or more ago, when this matter was up 
for discussion to some extent in Congress, I advocated a sliding scale 
of duty on wheat, whereby, when wheat cost $1 a bushel at certain 
points in the west, the duty might be eliminated; or, as the wheat 
advanced 1 cent, the duty reduced 1 cent, until it was wiped out 
entirely. I have gone beyond that point now. It was simply a 
matter of compromise, it was not a conviction that it was right, but 
simply to try and get co-operation among the interests that would 
naturally resent the elimination of the tariff, — the farmer; but I am 
now firm in the belief that that tariff should be wiped out completely, 
not only on wheat, but on all food stuffs. With regard to the profits 
on manufacturing, I will say that in our own case of our total output, 
of about 50,000 barrels a day, we would gladly dispose of our product 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 371 

if we could be assured of constant running and the disposition of our 
full output, and would be satisfied with a profit of 1 per cent., and that 
is so close that it can hardly be an important factor in regulating the 
price to the customer. 

Q. When you speak of " our," Mr. Rothwell, to whom do you refer? 
A. The Bay State Milling Company, of which I am president. 

Q. That is, the manufacturer. A. The manufacturer; and I think 
that what is true of our company would be true of other large manu- 
facturers. It has been stated under oath, and before, I think, the 
United States Court, — I would have to look that up, — not before the 
United States Court, but I think before the Interstate Commerce Com- 
mission, — that the price of export flour did not average over 4 cents 
a barrel, the manufacturer's profit. I am speaking of the net profit; 
so that is not where you must look for an excessive price, if there is 
any, to the consumer in the price of flour. 

Q. Tell us a little more about the Canadian matter, Mr. Rothwell. 
Does the Liverpool importer pay less for Canadian wheat than he pays 
for our wheat? A. Decidedly less. You can buy an equal grade, pos- 
sibly a better grade of wheat to-day for May delivery, delivered at 
Fort William, which is the head of navigation on Lake Superior, where 
the elevators are, at about 9 cents a bushel less than in Duluth. 

Q. Nine cents? A. Yes; that would mean 45 cents a barrel of flour. 

Q. What is the tariff on wheat? A. Twenty-five cents a bushei. 

Q. We import no wheat, of course, from Canada? A. Certainly not; 
it is absolutely impossible, and there might be millions and millions of 
bushels across the border ready to be shipped into an American specu- 
lative market to break a corner, which is just as securely locked up as 
if it did not exist. 

Q. Did I understand you to say that in your judgment wheat could 
be produced as cheaply in the United States as in Canada? A. Yes, 
sir; by the elimination of the question of interest on the land. 

Q. That is an important question, is it not, — using up all our avail- 
able land for wheat growing? A. Well, our land to a certain extent is 
going out of wheat growing. The farmer of Minnesota to-day, for 
example, is diversifying his crops to a much greater extent than before, 
and after a few seasons of wheat he begins to put in oats, rye and 
even corn ; also he goes into dairying ; and the character of some of the 
agricultural regions of the west has undergone a complete change in 
that respect. 

Q. Why isn't that a proper charge, Mr. Rothwell, — interest on the 
land? The farmer has to pay interest, or find the means to pay for 
the land. Why shouldn't that be considered? It is an investment. 
A. I haven't expressed an opinion on that. I think perhaps that is a 
question for economists. The fact remains that we are having a lot of 
land sold in the northwest, — Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota and Nebraska, 
— at extremely high prices ; and men, good Americans, are going across 



372 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

the border and picking up cheap land and becoming citizens of Great 
Britain and Canada. 

Q. We used to be told, Mr. Rothwell, that the tariff on the staple 
articles of food made no difference to the farmer, because if there were 
no tariff none of the staple articles would be imported. A. Well, 
that was so, I suppose, up to Ihe time when consumption overtook 
production. 

Q. Yes; that is just what I am after, — if consumption has caught 
up? A. Consumption is now overtaking production very rapidly. We 
depend less upon the foreign markets than formerly for a market for 
our cereals, and the result of that, together with the holding capacity 
of the farmer, which I spoke of, is that we have smaller reserves in 
sight. 

Q. Do you share the opinion of Mr. Brown, of the New York Cen- 
tral lines, that the exportation of wheat will cease within a few years'? 
A. I am quite sure of that, yes; because, while our farms have not 
nearly reached the limit of their productiveness, the bringing of them 
to that limit will be expensive. We are raising in this country an aver- 
age, perhaps, of 15 bushels to the acre of wheat. Now, the average 
per acre in Great Britain is probably over 30, I think; when they have 
a crop down to 30, they regard it as a sort of national misfortune, but 
of course their lands are very heavily fertilized. Perhaps the lands 
in the northwest will come into fertilization; but when they do that, 
they will increase the cost of production veiy materially, so that the 
incentive to raise wheat for export will not exist. 

Q. Is there a movement on the part of American millers to start 
plants in Canada? A. Yes, sir; a number of them have already 
done so. 

Hay and the Milk Supply. — Hay in Montreal has in the 
last twenty years ranged from a minimnn of $7.64 per ton in 
1899 to $15.37 in 1907, its average in 1909 being $13.02, 
the price of the shippers being from $12 to $14 f.o.b. Hay 
here has been selling at from $20 to $24 per ton wholesale, 
choice hay retailing at from $26 to $27. 

Former Representative Frederick L. Fisher of Norwood, ex- 
pert on questions relating to the milk supply, was asked by a 
member of the commission : — 

From your observation and your information and your study, is 
it not true that there have been many times during that period to which 
you referred, from 1901 to the present time, when the ability to import 
Canadian hay would have meant the difference between profit and loss 
to the New England farmer, or would have represented the difference 
between cattle killed because they were unprofitable to have around? 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 373 

Mr. Fisher replied : — 

I should say not. The hay that would be imported from Canada 
would not be hay that could be fed largely — of course there might 
be exceptions to it — to cows. The hay largely imported from Canada 
at the present time is the coarser quality of hay, such as is fed to 
horses. In buying hay we discriminate between horse hay and cattle 
hay. If you are buying cattle hay, you buy fine clover mixed, or some- 
thing of that sort, and that particular kind of hay is kept at home and 
used there in Canada, and they ship only their coarser hay, which is 
always from $2 to $4 cheaper here than the finer hay, the cow hay, 
as we term it; so that I think the tariff would have no material effect 
upon the milk end of the production. 

Q. "Well, it would, if there were any shipped? A. Yes, it would, if 
there were. 

Q. If the tariff permitted them to ship it, don't you suppose the 
farmers who could ship at a profit and pay the freight would use 
it in case of shortage? A. I don't think they would ship a great 
deal of the cow hay quality; they prefer to use that at home, and ship 
the coarser. 

Q. Do you think there is much milk raised in Massachusetts on hay 
that is bought? A. Yes, sir; I don't think there are one-half of the 
farmers in the State of Massachusetts that raise their* own hay. 

Q. Not all of it? A. Yes. That is one thing that perhaps may be 
an advantage or disadvantage. I raise and sell $1,500 worth more 
of hay than I consume each year. I consider it more profitable to me 
to do it than to run it through my cows and get the milk. 

Q. Than to run it into milk and then sell the milk? A. Yes, sir. 

Arthur L. Robinson of the Chamber of Commerce, dealer 
m hay, told us that, although on account of the duty of $4 a 
ton — not changed by the Payne bill — there had been very 
little business in hay with Canada for the last few years, this 
past winter there had been considerable receipts, by reason of 
the excessively high prices here. We quote from the testi- 
mony : — 

Q. And there has been such a shortage here that you have been able 
to pay the duty and import from Canada? A. Yes, sir; we probably 
received 2,000 cars from Canada within the past four months, I should 
think. 

Q. To what do you attribute the shortage? A. We have had two 
short crops, not only of hay. but of grain, east of Buffalo. That is 
the reason that hay is so high here. — not only hay, but grain and 
feeds of different kinds. 



374 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Q. Have they not had a short crop in Canada as well? A. Yes; but 
they haven't exported as much as usual. Their hay goes to European 
markets usually, but with the high price here they could make more 
money to ship it to the United States and pay the duty than to export 
it across the water. 

Q. Is it true that at any period, or at various periods during the last 
decade, the New England farmer has been obliged to dispose of his 
cattle stock because of his inability to feed them? A. That has been 
the case this past year; they have disposed of more or less on account 
of the high price of feed. 

Q. Well, has it not been so also in prior years? A. -Not so much. 

Q. Would the removal of the duty on hay reduce the price of hay, 
in your judgment, by the whole difference? A. It wouldn't reduce 
it $4 a ton, but it would reduce it some, without doubt. 

Q. Would you want to hazard an estimate as to how much? 
A. Well, that would be pretty hard work to estimate. It would depend 
upon the crop, but I should think from $1 to $2 a ton would be a 
fair estimate that it would reduce it in New England. It would benefit 
the New England farmer. You take it in years like this year and 
last year, when the crop was short, they have to pay excessive prices 
for their hay. That would give them a chance to buy their hay at a 
reasonable price. 

Q. The city man always has the impression that the farmer never 
buys any hay. A. Well, that impression is wrong. 

Q. In normal years do many farmers have occasion to buy hay? 
A. No, very few; very few through New Hampshire, Vermont and 
Maine. There are quite a good many farmers, of course, in Massa- 
chusetts who have to buy their hay because they keep so many cows 
they cannot raise feed for them. 

Q. What would be the effect upon the farmers in New York State, 
for instance, who raise hay for the market, with the admission of Cana- 
dian hay free of duty, under normal conditions? A. They ordinarily 
would have to take a less price for their hay. In order to benefit New 
England, they would have to pay for it in a small way. 

Q. What is the shipping price from the west, railroad rates? 
A. Why, about $6 is the average. 

Q. From Montreal, from Canada? A. Yes; $3.60 is the average rate 
from there. 

Q. You also handle oats? A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you handle Canada oats? A. We haven't lately; no, sir. 

Q. Aren't able to, on account of the duty? A. No, sir. 

Q. The duty is 25 cents a bushel, isn't it? A. We buy them all 
f.o.b., Boston. I don't know the duty on oats, but we handle very 
few Canadian oats, because their oats aren't good enough for our 
trade. Our oats in our trade are run through the clipping machine, and 
our customers are educated up to that, and refuse natural growth. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 375 

Q. Don't they have a system of clipping there, too? A. They may 
have, in some sections. 

Q. But you haven't been able to have any clipped oats from Canada? 
A. Xo; we haven't. 

Sugar. — Dwight P. Thomas of the Revere Sugar Refinery 
said to the commission : — 

The tariff tends to make the price of sugar in this country, I believe, 
about l 1 /^ or 2 cents a pound higher than it would be if there were no 
tariff; and if the tariff were reduced, the price of sugar would drop 
that much. The tariff is no protection to refined sugar. Personally, 
I would just as soon see the tariff taken off sugar. We could buy our 
raw product cheaper. It would subsequently increase, and the price 
to the consumer would be less. We can compete with any country in 
the world, as far as sugar is concerned. Last year there was exported 
some 30,000 or 40,000 tons of refined sugar, and we imported only 
700 tons. I believe with Cuba, Porto Rico, Hawaii and the Philippine 
Islands that we can make sugar cheaper than any other country in the 
world. 



We quote further from his testimony : — 

Q. The present tariff was a very slight reduction over the Dingley, — 
very little modification, if any? A. There was no modification, practi- 
cally. It only meant that there was 300,000 tons of Philippine Island 
sugar allowed to come into this country free of duty, and it will take 
some time before the Philippine Islands can manufacture that much 
sugar. That is the only change; and as that amount of sugar is so 
small, compared with the full amount of sugar imported here, it would 
probably make no difference in the price. 

Q. So the tariff does not cut any figure in it, — that is, so as to be 
any explanation of the increased cost; there has been no increase in 
the tariff in recent years, I understand? A. Xo; there has been no 
increase. In 1903, under the reciprocity treaty with Cuba, there was 
a 20 per cent, reduction on Cuban sugars imported into this country. 
The full rate of duty is 1.68% cents a pound on sugars, and on Cuban 
sugars 1.348 cents. That is about 30 points, or 30 cents per 100 pounds, 
the Cuban is supposed to get on the importations of raw sugar. 

Q. Beet sugar is not refined? A. Yes; it is manufactured right 
from the beet root into the refined sugar, right at the one mill. 

Q. What do you think would be the effect of the beet sugar industry 
on the producer if you were to take the tariff off sugar? A. Why, 
it is a question, which is an open one, how much it would cost the 
beet sugar producer to make refined sugar, and I am not familiar with 



376 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

those figures. I have heard figures given; they vary very widely. Of 
course the tariff is a protection to the beet sugar producers, and they 
would feel it very much if the tariff were wiped out or reduced. 

Q. What percentage do you import of raw sugars? A. All of our 
sugar, — do you mean the total? 

Q. Yes; what percentage of cane sugars are raised in this country, — 
Louisiana, for instance, and in that region? A. In Louisiana last year 
it was 409,000 tons, — Louisiana and Texas, so that that is — 

Q. What percentage of the total? A. About 12 per cent. 

Q. And then 13 per cent, of beet sugar would make a total of 25 
per cent., combined, of all the sugars that we produce in this country, 
and 75 per cent, imported, — is that a fair basis? A. Here are the 
exact figures totalled: domestic sugar raised in this country, which 
is cane, beet, maple sugar, molasses sugar, is 864,096 tons, and 3,257,600 
is the total; that is about 25 per cent. 

Q. Have molasses and syrup fluctuated through a wider range than 
sugar in the last decade? A. No; I shouldn't say so. We export a 
great deal of our syrup; we get a higher price abroad for it. It is 
not used here very much, but in England and Scotland they use it a 
great deal as we use maple syrup, — that is, on their cakes and one 
thing and another like that. I don't think they use it here very much. 
They mix it with molasses considerably. 

Q. If that duty of 1.68 cents a pound were taken off raw sugars, 
wouldn't that probably severely injure the Louisiana grower? A. Well, 
it probably would now; but if they put in modern methods, and kept 
up to date, it probably wouldn't injure them very much. 

Q. Isn't it a fact that a great deal of this raw sugar is produced in 
countries where labor is an extremely low item? A. I think so; yes. 

Clothing and Wearing Apparel. — It has been published 
that " the Windsor man pays $15 for a suit of clothes that 
the Detroit man will find it difficult to duplicate in quality 
for $25." In this matter our investigation confirmed the 
result of previous personal observations of the commissioners, 
to the effect that men's clothes are to be bought cheaper in 
Canada than here, but, though for garments of the same price 
the fabric is better in the Canadian suit, the workmanship 
is not so good. Precisely the same thing is true in a com- 
parison of English and American clothes. To be sure, one 
of the leading clothiers of Detroit said he would undertake to 
put on the market at the Windsor price a suit of clothes both 
of better material and of better workmanship ; but it is doubt- 
ful if anybody would make this a practice. The average cost 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 377 

of the woolen cloth in a ready-made suit of clothes, selling at 
$15 in Boston, is about $4.40, or about 30 per cent, of the 
retail price. The buyer, therefore, pays a good deal more 
for other things than for the cloth. In deciding which country 
gives him the better trade, he will have to decide to which 
feature of the garment he will attach the most importance. We 
are told that a good many Detroit young men go over to 
Windsor to have their clothes tailor-made, and that a good 
many Windsor young men go over to Detroit to buy ready-made 
clothes. We have noticed that some men who go back and 
forth between London and America on business get their 
clothes made in London for a while, and often return later to 
American tailors. One member of the commission asked a 
high-grade London tailor why he did not make better clothes. 
" Because you have taken all our best workmen," he answered. 
The suit he made for the questioner had to be remade when it 
reached this side. 

Through the courtesy of the T. Eaton Company, proprie- 
tors of a huge department store in Toronto, who gave the 
commissioners every opportunity for full information on every 
point of inquiry, with a generosity of time and patience which 
we would acknowledge, opportunity was had to examine garments 
in every stage of manufacture, in large and excellent work- 
rooms. The commissioners came away with the belief that 
little is to be known about the real value of a suit of clothes 
unless you have seen its inside. If this company does not 
make clothes so well as they are made in the States, we con- 
cluded that it is because .not so good work people are to be had. 
The fact that it also has a factory in Montreal, because it 
cannot get help enough in Toronto, has some significance. 

Through the whole field of manufacture we gained the im- 
pression that things are not so well made in Canada as in the 
United States, and that this is particularly the case where the 
artistic sense enters as a factor. Perhaps the Canadian arti- 
cles will wear as long, or even do better service; but if the 
American people are willing to pay for the looks of a thing, 
as well as for its wear, they will get more for their money 
at home ; and evidently that is what the American people want, 
or else it would not be the tiling offered to them. 



378 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

In the year ending June 30, 1909, we exported to Canada 
woolen wearing apparel to the value of $825,810. 

The moment we get into the domain of cotton, whether in 
the matter of men's outer garments partly of cotton, or 
women's apparel, or underclothing, the Canadian advantage 
in respect to woolen material disappears, and prices are on 
the American level or higher. All admit that we can do better 
on footwear in the States. 

One Windsor man told a commissioner that the Windsor 
women crossed over to Detroit to get their hats, boots and silk 
hosiery; and that Detroit women came over to Windsor for 
furs, feathers and gloves. 

The table of comparisons that has been widely published 
says that identically the same grade of men's hats that costs 
$5 in Detroit can be bought in Windsor for $3. That is 
perfectly true, but not wholly fair. The hat in question is a 
Christie hat, imported from England, selling partly on the 
strength of a reputation, as with our Dunlap, Knox or Stetson 
hats. One Detroit dealer averred that he could furnish as good 
an American hat for $3.50. The proprietor of a store making 
a specialty of dollar hats said that he sold many to Canadians. 
Very likely, though, men's hats of the same quality cost more 
with us, on the whole. It is another case in which it would 
be a good thing to have an American income and a foreign 
outgo ; to sell your labor on one side of the line and buy your 
supplies on the other. 

It does not, however, appear that in the Windsor-Detroit 
case even this has noteworthy advantages. To try to settle 
it, a commissioner asked the captain of the ferry-boat plying 
between the two countries where he made his purchases. 
" Sometimes in one place, sometimes in the other," he said. 
" I live in Windsor, and so I buy most of my things for the 
house there." He most certainly had no clear preference, as 
would of course have been the case had either place offered a 
decided advantage. 

During the last fiscal year Canada imported articles that 
go to make up the stock of the dealer in men's furnishing 
goods, as follows : — 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



379 





Totals. 


Imported 


FROM — 


ARTICLES. 


United 
States. 


United 
Kingdom. 


Hats and caps, 


$2,592,039 


$1,078,582 


$1,360,516 


Collars and cuffs, 


164,809 


83,478 


48,568 


Shirts, cotton, 


214,788 


119,172 


23,519 


Underwear, 


546,818 


79,180 


400,129 


Umbrellas, 


100,621 


18,675 


79,867 


Gloves and mitts, 


2,281,668 


678,669 


772,058 


Socks and stockings: — 

Wool, 

Cotton 


933,115 
227,739 


9,610 
19,807 


833,412 
190,244 


Handkerchiefs: — 

Cotton, 

Linen, 

Silk, 


368,592 
174,493 
56,046 


5,365 
1,760 
5,367 


310,063 

152,848 
18,863 


Suspenders 


45,409 


26,696 


15,078 


Totals 


$7,706,137 


$2,126,661 


$4,205,165 



The Canadian tariff on these articles ranges from 20 to 35 
per cent., with a preference to the United Kingdom and other 
British possessions of from 7% to 12% per cent. It is not 
probable that these things sold in Canada at a price below the 
price in the country of export. Consul Frank Deedmeyer 
say? that the main reasons why Great Britain sells to Canada 
double the quantity of men's furnishing goods imported from 
the United States are: first, that British exporters canvass 
every section of this country thoroughly and regularly by 
Canada-born traveling men; and, second, British exporters 
share with the retailers of their products the expense of adver- 
tising their goods. Many American exporters send their travel- 
ing salesmen to the larger cities only. The population of 
Canada is lar^elv rural. 



2. Europe, and the United States. 
Turning to England and the continent, we are unable, of 
course, to offer any conclusions based on personal inquiry 
since our appointment, and must, so far as we ourselves are 
concerned, rely on travelers' observations, notoriously inade- 
quate. It chances, however, that several members of the com- 
mission have had occasion to pass more or less time abroad, 
and were not unmindful of the problem of comparative cost 



380 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

of living. One of them, who entered on a journey of several 
months with a strong conviction that tariffs were an impor- 
tant element in the cost of living, returned with an equally 
strong conviction that they are relatively unimportant, at least 
in their direct bearing. He found that in Naples and southern 
Italy, the paradise of the unemployed, living was cheaper than 
in Rome, and in Rome was cheaper than in northern Italy, 
all the country being heavily taxed alike. France cost more, 
with a protective tariff. England cost more still, with no 
protective tariff. The costliest country he found was Holland, 
with free trade. He concluded that the price scale of a people is 
largely a matter of temperament, custom and climate. 

J. D. Whelpley says, in an article published in the " Inde- 
pendent/' April 7, 1910 : — 

There is an impression, fostered by novels and by travelers who 
dwell in lodgings, that living is considerably cheaper in England than 
it is here. This is true in regard to certain matters which are depend- 
ent upon the price of labor. Service is comparatively cheap in Eng- 
land and on the continent, and dear in American cities. But as regards 
food stuffs, free-trade England is at this moment paying higher prices 
for most of its groceries than is protected America. 

Mr. Whelpley explains one reason why mistakes in com- 
parison are made, when he says : — 

There are two retail prices for most things in England, — the work- 
ing-class price and the average family price. No such variation exists 
in America, except in so far as neighborhoods affect prices. The high- 
class grocery, which has a monopoly of suburban trade, is apt to sell at 
higher prices than the corner shop, which must meet competition and 
cater to those who count their pennies. 

President Gompers of the American Federation of labor 
said, in his report on returning from Europe, printed in the 
" American Federationist " for January, 1910 : — 

Mentally contemplating the many cities I visited, and having in mind 
the conversations I had with workingmen who had lived both in Europe 
and America, I believe I may assert that whether the cost of living in 
Europe or America is greater to the workingman depends entirely upon 
the standard of living he adopts while in America. If he voluntarily 
lives the life of self-denial in this country that he compulsorily lived in 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 381 

his native land, his outlay in money will remain about the same. Even 
then he will hardly be able to escape gaining something from the supe- 
rior quality of the good things of life in America. 

Living is cheap to the wage worker in Europe only because he does 
without what in America soon becomes a necessity to him, — food in 
good quantity and quality, presentable clothes among his aspiring fel- 
low countrymen and their families, and a comfortably furnished home, 
in quarters responding to his awakened desires and freer life. . . . 
In the United Kingdom the poor dress in much the same clothing sum- 
mer and winter, the large propoi'tion of the people in shabby clothes 
in the streets of Dublin, Manchester and London giving an impression 
to the American observer of a prevalent poverty. . . . Fine wool and. 
silk stuffs, furs, laces and kid gloves cost less abroad than in the 
United States, — a fact, however, which bears as lightly in an inquiry 
into the conditions of the masses as does the tariff on the masterpieces of 
art. . . . The main conclusion as to housing is the same as that relat- 
ing to food: if the immigrant to this country is willing to continue 
living here at the same level he was obliged to accept in his native 
land, he can find it for the same money. 

The views of President Gompers are confirmed by a member 
of the commission who has worked for a wage in both London 
and Boston. 

Inevitably, in all comparisons between countries the ob- 
server's judgment is more or less warped by his own up-bring- 
ing, his habits and tastes, so that he is unconsciously influenced 
by his personal standards. This should be borne in mind in 
weighing the views of foreign critics. Yet they ought to be 
considered, lest we err from taking only our own view-point, 
doubtless affected by our own instincts. The best foreign 
statement of the case which we have found is that of Dr. 
Arthur Shadwell, in his book on " Industrial Efficiency," from 
which we have previously quoted : — 

My general conclusion -is, that food on the whole is considerably 
cheaper in industrial England than in industrial America or Germany 
and probably somewhat cheaper in America than in Germany. The 
markets and the co-operative stores in England are a very important 
element in the provision of cheap food. They are more general than 
elsewhere; indeed, they are almost universal, and form one of the most 
striking features of English urban life. In Germany the markets are 
almost always held in the open air only, and do not play the same 
part in the life of the people as the covered markets in England. 
Co-operative retail stores are fairly common, but they are on nothing 



382 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

like the same scale as in England, and especially in the manufactur- 
ing towns. The English retail societies numbered 1,469 in 1904, 
with a membership of 2,078,178, and their sales amounted to about 
£59,311,934; in Germany the co-operative movement has developed 
more in the direction of agricultural and credit societies, and the retail 
stores, though an appreciable factor, are comparatively unimportant. 
In America co-operation has hitherto been a failure, and it counts for 
nothing; a good many of the great towns have markets, but many have 
not, including Chicago and such typical manufacturing towns as Fall 
River, Lowell, Lawrence, Lynn, New Bedford and Providence. In 
towns of this class markets are exceptional. . . . 

If an English workman living at Bolton or Bradford or Sheffield 
emigrates with his family to Fall River or Philadelphia or Pittsburg, — 
or from any English manufacturing town to a corresponding one in 
the United States, — and expects, on the strength of the foregoing or 
any other figures, to buy the food he is accustomed to eat at the price 
he is accustomed to give, he will meet with a great disappointment. 
He will get some things cheaper, to wit, fruit and poultry (which he 
never buys at home) ; and some things about the same price, or a little 
less, to wit, milk, eggs and bacon; but bread, meat, vegetables and 
sugar will cost him quite half as much again. . . . 

The case with regard to Germany is somewhat similar. German beef 
is very fair, and as good as the American, but not equal to English; 
the mutton is very poor; pork and veal are much the same in all coun- 
tries. As for prices, I estimate them to be somewhat higher than in 
America for corresponding qualities. Wheat flour is also dearer in 
Germany, but rye bread and flour are cheaper. This is commonly 
called " black " bread, and the expression is erroneously used as a 
term of contempt. Rye bread is excellent, and particularly appetizing; 
it is commonly served in first-class German hotels with white bread, 
as " brown " bread is sometimes served in England as a delicacy. For 
my own part, I prefer the rye bread, on account of its flavor, and 
always ate it for breakfast in hotels. . . . 

It should be clearly understood that I am comparing families of the 
same size and income, as nearly as possible; and the conclusion is, that 
within these limits the expenditure on food is a little higher in the 
American than in the German families, and considerably higher in the 
British than in the American families. A larger portion of the income 
is spent on food in the British families; the mean percentage is 61.09, 
while that of all the American families is only 43.13 ; but for American 
families of like size and income, namely, with four children and up 
to $800 of income, it is 50.94; in the whole of the German families it 
is 49.7. It does not follow, however, that families occupying the same 
social or industrial position have this relative expenditure in the three 
countries. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 383 

As illustrating the dangers that beset even so competent and 
intelligent an observer as Dr. Shadwell, it may be pointed out 
that he nodded when he said : — 

Fruit is mostly cheaper in America, but not always; in my by no 
means very well appointed hotel in Philadelphia the price of an orange 
was lOd. If hotel prices counted, however, the cost of food would be 
at least double in America. 

To give the impression that a price of 20 cents apiece for 
oranges is common here, illustrates the class of errors into which 
writers on prices lead their readers. As a matter of fact, it is 
not easy to buy in Europe, at any price, an orange that ap- 
proaches in quality those we have in abundance at from 30 to 
40 cents a dozen. It would be about as useful and fair for us to 
say, what is the fact, that one member of the commission was 
offered in Jamaica last year oranges at 2 cents a hundred. 
They were on the tree, and were worse than useless unless they 
could be got to market, as they ought to be picked for t'he good 
of the tree, and the return would not repay the labor of picking. 

An exhaustive inquiry into working class rents, housing and 
retail prices, together with rates of wages in industrial towns 
of different countries, was undertaken in 1907 by the British 
Board of Trade. The results of the investigation in Great 
Britain, Germany and France have been published; the report 
of the investigation in the United States has not yet been issued. 
The general result of the inquiry, so far as the German and 
French conditions are concerned, may be summarized briefly as 
follows : — 

It appears that the average rate of wages is about 25 per cent, 
lower in Germany than in Great Britain, while the cost of 
living, if the comparison be based upon the same general 
standard of expenditure, is about 20 per cent, higher. In 
France wages are somewhat lower than in Germany, and the 
cost of living slightly higher. Thus, according, to the investi- 
gations of the Board of Trade, the conditions of living for the 
working class in Great Britain, Germany and France form a 
descending series, in the order given. 



384 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

3. Massachusetts and the Tariff. 

Massachusetts comes far from feeding itself. In conse- 
quence of our extremely small percentage of agricultural 
workers and the excess of population in proportion to available 
farm land, the State is mainly dependent on outside sources for 
its food supply. 

If, then, we are sure to buy from two-thirds to five-sixths 
of our food from producers at a distance, if by no possibility we 
can get whatever advantage might arise from relying on our 
own farmers for the great bulk of our food supply, no obliga- 
tion prevents us from seeking to buy in the cheapest market 
available, unless it be found among the reciprocal obligations of 
the tariff system. But the tariff was never meant to apply 
seriously to the food of the people, save for the development of 
such industries as the growing of fruit in Florida or beets for 
sugar in the west. From the first it was designed to create and 
preserve manufacturing industries. The odium of the corn 
laws need but be suggested, to show how obnoxious would be a 
serious tax on food. If we have reached the point where it is 
of real importance to us to have the product of the farms of the 
north as well as that of the farms of the west, no tariff hin- 
drance can be endured. 

The purpose of a protective tariff is to benefit the nation as a 
whole, not to benefit any one class or section at the expense of 
another, not to dispense favors or privileges. If individual 
benefits come, they are such as are incidental to all undertakings 
for the common welfare. They are not reprehensible nor do 
they create any reciprocal obligations. No one part of our 
country owes anything to any other part because of the tariff. 
If the contrary were the case, then the tariff would be logically 
indefensible. It justifies itself because its purpose is national, 
not sectional. 

That purpose with us is the maintenance of a system of man- 
ufacturing industries which shall keep us independent, shall 
diversify our occupations and shall make adequate use of our 
natural resources, at the same time providing revenue for our 
national needs. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 385 

Manufacturing plants are built slowly, must be kept in 
operation, and cannot be readily shifted to other uses than 
those for which they were designed. 

With agriculture the case is different. The field that grows 
corn this year may grow potatoes the next year ; cattle may be 
replaced by swine within a few years; in brief, the farm can 
adapt itself to changed conditions. 

It would be both improvident and cruel to destroy the value 
of our textile mills by the repeal of a statute. It would not be 
cruel and it would not be improvident, by opening eastern 
markets to Canadian eggs, for example, to make it unprofitable 
for our western farmers to raise so much poultry. If, for their 
own profit, western farmers reduce the number of swine in the 
country in a single year, January, 1909, to January, 1910, 
from 54,147,000 to 47,782,000 — a reduction of 12 per cent., 
— it is hard to see how they could suffer serious injury by being 
asked to turn into other channels, perhaps actually more re- 
munerative, the energy and capital now used in producing such 
eggs as the Canadian supplies would replace. The poultrymen 
of our own State could suffer not at all. They would still get 
the premium on " fresh " or " near-by " eggs. Their market is 
assured by geographical considerations. The same thing is true 
of milk and garden produce. Indeed, it is not probable that any 
relatively considerable part of the product of our Massachusetts 
agriculture now marketed and not consumed on the farm 
would come into competition with foreign produce, were our 
markets opened to all comers. 

So the Massachusetts farmer has nothing to fear from such 
a course, but, on the contrary, has much to gain. Our physical 
limitations and the competition of mill and factory for the 
available help make it sure that he can at best no more than 
furnish a quarter or a third of our food. His nearness to the 
market makes it certain that no remote competitor can under- 
sell him on that part of our food which he can most profitably 
produce. As to the rest, he will benefit in common with all other 
consumers. He has as much to gain as anybody from the grain 
that will henceforward in ever-growing flood come from the vast 
prairies of the Canadian northwest. It will feed his poultry 



386 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

and fatten his cattle ; it will help revive the dairy, which ought 
to be his mainstay and will make it cheaper for him to work the 
market garden and develop the orchard. 

ISTor could the wage earner suffer. One great object of the 
protective tariff system is to maintain our wage scale and 
standard of living above that found in other lands. It is not 
probable that the removal of the duty on farm products would 
diminish by a penny the wage rate of farm laborers anywhere 
in the United States. That rate is determined by the competi- 
tion of the mill and the attractiveness of the city. When every 
farmer complains that he cannot get or keep help, no harm can 
befall the wage rate of the farm laborer if the people are 
allowed to buy their food where it can be bought cheapest. 

Extension of " Canadian reciprocity " in the field of manu- 
factures is, in our belief, for the present out of the question. 
The forces now dominant in Canada would not listen to any 
proposition that would endanger her growing industries, and 
there is no reason why they should. It is not for the United 
States, a majority of the citizens of which are confident of the 
worth of the protective system in developing manufactures, to 
begrudge her neighbor the benefits of the same system. There 
was a time when Canada might have been willing to have her 
textiles made in Manchester, Eng., or Manchester, N". H. 
That time has passed. We are not likely again to get on a 
footing where a bargain is possible, until the Canadian fac- 
tories feel equal to self-reliance. Meanwhile, it is of the utmost 
importance to maintain amicable relations, under which each 
party can from time to time make concessions and extend 
reciprocal relations without loss of either advantage or of 
dignity, as has recently been so admirably illustrated. These 
will at least not be discouraged if we can make it possible for 
our people to buy their food in the cheapest market. If Canada 
chances to profit by supplying our needs to some small extent, 
so much the better, both for Canada and for ourselves. But 
there is no reason why we should restrict our new purchases to 
Canada. If Mexico, or Argentina, or Australia, can help us, 
let us turn to them as well. 

It is not our belief that removal of the tariff on the staple arti- 
cles of food would speedily and greatly reduce the cost of living. 



1910.] HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 387 

The same causes are making food high in all the civilized 
world, and the difference between wholesale prices is not enough 
to warrant the expectation that a policy of what for brevity's 
sake would doubtless be called " free food " could change inter- 
national transactions greatly and at once. Its importance conies 
from the fact that we are soon going to buy a material part of 
our food outside our own limits. It would further have the 
very beneficial consequence of removing what chance may now 
exist to " comer " food products, — a chance that puts the 
public at the mercy of the speculator and the trust. To some 
extent, also, it would lessen our dependence on the seasons and 
the weather. Bad harvests rarely occur over all the world. 

We submit, therefore, that it is a wise economic policy to 
give the people free access to those articles of food that call for 
the bulk of the expenditure of the masses. For purposes of 
revenue it may be wise to tax somewhat the comforts, and the 
heaviest duties should be levied on the luxuries, but the food 
necessities of life should be " free." We have not deemed it 
feasible to attempt to draw conclusions about the effect of the 
protection given to our manufactures upon the cost of living. 
It is manifest that if the tariff did not raise the prices of pro- 
tected articles, it would fail of its purpose, which is to give 
the American manufacturer a return that will let him compete 
with the foreign manufacturer. It would equally fail of its 
purpose if the compensating advantage to the general pros- 
perity of the country did not more than offset the cost. 

There is to-day in this country no important body of opinion 
hostile to the protective principle. Both the great political 
parties are committed to it. The only questions are those of 
detail. 

To declare that the last word has been spoken in the matter 
of individual rates would be absurd. A perfect schedule is an 
impossibility. President Taft, while preferring that the tariff 
bill would have been different in some particulars, is of the 
belief that the tariff bill recently enacted was the best that the 
country has yet achieved ; but it does not follow that some day 
improvement will not be made. 

It has been the American practice to revise the tariff at 
intervals of several years. The result has been a periodical dis- 



388 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

turbance of business, with adjustment more or less affected by 
political considerations. The leading commercial organizations 
of the country are of the belief that a wiser course would be to 
make the adjustments a commercial rather than a political 
affair; to take the tariff out of politics, as is the practice in 
Germany. Agreeing with this view, President Taft urges that 
the Tariff Commission be equipped with funds enough to make 
its researches adequate as a basis for future legislation, for in 
Congress alone is vested the constitutional right to make tariffs. 
We share in this view, and hope that if the commission in 
question has not already sufficient powers, Congress may provide 
them. 

Our general conclusion as to the tariff is that it is not a 
cause of the recent increase of the cost of living. 

In this connection the minority member of the commission, 
Edward F. McSweeney, desires to make the following state- 
ment : — 

Since the civil war we have had various tariffs, two of which were 
passed by Democratic Congresses, all making changes in various sched- 
ules; each successive tariff, considered as a whole, showing an advance 
in the rates levied over the one preceding. After 1873 and continuing 
until 1897 there was a period of decline in the prices of all commodi- 
ties. The national campaign of 1896 was contested on a currency issue 
because of this twenty-three-year price decline, commodity prices then 
being at their lowest point. Since 1897 until to-day there has been, 
broadly speaking, a constant increase in the prices of commodities, 
this being especially marked during the past three years. We have 
thus had high tariffs, differing only in degree, during a period of fall- 
ing prices for twenty-three years and a period of rising prices for 
thirteen years. The evidence taken by the commission and all the 
available statistics from reliable sources show that during the fall and 
the rise of prices of the last thirty-seven years tariff -favored commodi- 
ties fell and rose in price with commodities with which the tariff was not 
a factor; and in fact during the recent rise the advance in prices has 
been most marked in goods on which the tariff has little or no effect. 
Under the conditions, I agree with the statement that the tariff is not 
the basic cause of the increase of the cost of living during the period 
in question. 

In the conclusion of the commission, if not its precise wording, that 
food stuffs should be on the free list, and that the tariff as a whole 
should be taken absolutely out of politics and put on a business basis, 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 389 

as in Germany, so that a revision of any particular schedule will not 
disturb business conditions, I most heartily agree. 

In view of the absolute fairness which the commission has manifested 
in its efforts to get the facts, the impartial way in which these facts 
have been assembled and judicially reported, and especially keeping 
in mind the supreme importance of having the interesting, instructive 
and timely work of this commission go to the Legislature free from 
all bias or partisanship, so that it may be discussed on its merits, as 
its importance demands, I have deemed it improper to interject into 
this discussion any personal views which I may have regarding the 
indirect influence of tariff legislation on prices or on the unequal dis- 
tribution of wealth. 

E. THE TRUSTS. 

The influence of trusts upon prices was investigated at the 
request of the commission by Prof. J. W. Jenks of Cornell 
University. The previous investigation of this subject, made 
by Professor Jenks for the Industrial Commission about ten 
years ago, gave him unusual qualifications for undertaking this 
further inquiry. The report of Professor Jenks is submitted as 
the report of the commission. His views are accepted and pre- 
sented by the commission as representing its views regarding the- 
effect of the trusts upon the movement of prices in general and 
the recent advance of prices in particular. 

In considering the influence of trusts on prices, the fact 
should first be noted that the general advance in prices has not 
been confined to the United States, but has been world-wide. 
Moreover, the increase has not been confined to any one line of 
industry, but, with here and there an exception, all prices have 
risen. In consequence, the cause must be a general one. — 
practically universal. The only cause which will affect all prices 
in civilized countries in much the same way is a cause that has 
to do with a standard of measurement of prices, — in other 
words, gold. There can 'be no question, as the commission re- 
ports elsewhere, that there has been this general increase in 
prices mentioned, and that at the same time there has been an 
increase in the output of gold, the monetary standard of the 
civilized world, sufficient to decrease materially its value as 
compared with the value? of other goods, and in consequence to 
increase prices. 



390 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

^Nevertheless, the trusts have also doubtless had their in- 
fluence either one way or the other, and this influence demands 
detailed study. In order to get anything like an accurate 
estimate of this influence, a comparative study must be made 
of as many special articles as possible that are manufactured 
by the trusts, comparing the course of these prices with the 
course of prices of articles manufactured by independent com- 
petitors. Such a comparative study will enable us to see the 
apparent influence of the trusts, and will assist us to reach 
some reasonable conclusions. 

Before citing definite figures, however, and charting them, 
we may well ask what the conditions of modern business would 
lead us to expect from the trusts. 

The organizers of the great industrial combinations have 
usually asserted that they expect through the savings which 
can be made by combination, to produce at much less cost 
than was possible under a system of competition, with its 
many wastes. They claim that the trusts make large savings 
in freight charges ; in running the best plants at full capacity, 
while closing those less favorably equipped or situated; in the 
more advantageous distribution of material and orders, so as 
to save labor ; in the most effective use of the ability of experts 
and of superintendents, by giving to each the opportunity to 
spend his full time on work for which he is best equipped ; in 
doing away with competitive advertising; with useless duplica- 
tion of selling agents and of other classes of a labor force ; and 
in many other ways. It has indeed been clearly demonstrated 
that some of these savings can be made by a wisely managed 
combination under many conditions, so that the cost of pro- 
duction may be in many instances considerably decreased. 

On the other hand, it has been established in certain cases 
that, although the trust manufacturers might at times produce 
more cheaply than their competitors, they have not always found 
it advisable to reduce their selling prices to an extent correspond- 
ing to the saving in the cost of production. Instead, they have 
increased their prices. 

In other cases experience seems to have shown the managers 
of some of the larger combinations that it is good policy not to 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 391 

exploit the public too far by pushing prices very high, even 
when monopolistic power would permit such action, since it has 
been found that high prices call in new competitors, who in 
turn must be bought off or whose lower prices must be met at 
considerable loss. Some of the larger combinations, therefore, 
have thought it wise to maintain reasonable prices, so low that 
they would not tempt many competitors into the Held, being 
thus satisfied with good profits that were steady, instead of 
with first high profits and then low profits or none at all. 

Again, the trusts have sometimes fixed prices at a certain 
rate and maintained them steady under changing conditions and 
varying costs of production, thus securing the confidence of 
customers, producers in other lines and of the public. To steady 
prices has seemed to be the object, rather than to seize every 
opportunity of securing high prices. 

Let us now note how the principles of trust management just 
mentioned are shown in certain special cases. 

1. Sugar. 

The lines on Diagram I. represent standard refined and raw 
sugars in the United States and Germany, and raw sugar in 
England. For America the refined sugar considered (line A) 
is the granulated; the raw sugar (line B), the 96° centrifugal. 
The German sugars are: for the refined, the granulated first 
marks f.o.b. at Hamburg (line 1) ; the raw sugar, the German 
beet root 88 per cent, f.o.b. Hamburg (line 2). 

The English raw sugar represented (line a) is the English 
Java afloat, a 96° test, United Kingdom terms. This English 
raw sugar corresponds closely with the American 96° cen- 
trifugal. The English refined sugar not quoted here is Tate's 
cubes, a special grade which normally brings somewhat more 
than the regular price of the American granulated sugar, prob- 
ably at times nearly % cent more. 

The German sugars, both raw and refined, are of somewhat 
poorer quality than the American sugars. Moreover, the refined 
beet sugars are made directly by a single process from the beet 
roots themselves, both raw sugars and refined being produced in 
the same establishment. The refined beet sugar, even in the 



392 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

United States, is not considered quite np to the grade of the 
cane sugars produced in the refineries in the east. It sells even 
in the Chicago markets somewhat lower than the refined sugars 
from the cane which are produced in the eastern refineries. 

The line C on the diagram represents in its distance from the 
bottom of the diagram the perpendicular distance between A 
and B. It measures, therefore, the cost of refining the sugar 
plus the profit to the refiner. The cost of refining sugar does 
not vary materially from month to month or even from year to 
year, excepting as improved processes tend to lower somewhat 
the cost of refining; on the other hand, any increase in wages, 
or any increase in the cost of boneblack, one of the chief costs 
in refining, or any increase in the rate of interest upon capital 
invested, or any increase in the cost of the raw material used 
in building refineries, necessitating the investment of a larger 
amount of capital, would tend to increase slightly the cost of 
refining. In the main, however, the fluctuations in this line C 
would show fluctuations in the profit, especially where these 
fluctuations are simply from month to month or from year to 
year. 

The line 3 represents in similar manner the perpendicular dis- 
tance between lines 1 and 2, and is thus the margin showing the 
cost of refining plus the profit of the German refiners. It will 
be noted that this line is regularly considerably lower than the 
line C. There are probably two reasons for this. The first, 
already mentioned, is that the German beet sugars are made by 
a single process, the same as the raw sugars, so that the cost of 
refining is considerably less, and as has already been indicated, 
the quality of the refined sugar is also not quite so good. More- 
over, inasmuch as in their process of refining they use no bone- 
black, the cost of their material is somewhat less, and German 
wages are distinctly lower. We should expect this margin, 
therefore, to be somewhat lower than that in America. In 
addition to that, as the rate of interest in Germany rules some- 
what lower than in the United States, the Germans are probably 
content with a somewhat less rate of profit. Furthermore, 
during a considerable time preceding the International Sugar 
Union Convention there was a bounty on sugar exported from 
Germany. This bounty it would seem would tend to lessen 



88-5 18 



908 1903 




1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 393 

somewhat the price of the refined sugar, as compared with 
the raw. That, however, does not appear in this margin. 

Let us note now particularly the fluctuations in line C, repre- 
senting in rough outline the history of the profits of American 
refineries. The actual cost of refining, of course, varies some- 
what, but, according to the testimony given by the refiners at 
the time of the Industrial Commission investigation in 1899, 
the probability is that the actual cost was not far from 50 
cents a hundred, although the president of the American Sugar 
Refining Company, Henry O. Havemeyer, declared that, while 
that might be considered the bare cost of refining, at least 24 
cents more ought to be added, on account of the waste in raising 
sugar from 96° to 100°, the polariscope test of the refined. He 
thus thought that the margin necessary for profit should be put 
at some 75 cents a hundred, instead of from 50 to 60 cents. 
He apparently reckoned in some interest on the investment with 
the cost, whereas some of the other witnesses apparently did not 
do this. Mr. Jarvis, for example, of Arbuckle Brothers, testified 
that, with a margin of from 50 to 60 cents at that time, sugar 
could be refined without loss; while Claus Doscher was willing 
to state that refining could be done without loss on a margin of 
50 cents. Mr. Post, a commission merchant in sugar and 
molasses, selling agent of the Mollenhauer and National sugar 
refining companies (independent), was inclined to put the neces- 
sary margin somewhat higher than Mr. Doscher, about 60 cents, 
but he, although in a rival company, conceded that a great 
establishment like the American Refining Company's establish- 
ments ought to have an advantage of from 3 to 5 cents a hundred 
in refining. 

Another point which should be kept in mind when judging 
this margin, although the influence is often scarcely noticeable 
on the diagram, is that, in order to secure the same profit, the 
margin between the raw and the refined sugars must be slightly 
greater when the price of raw sugar is high, inasmuch as the 
loss of weight is a more expensive waste. If, for example, with 
raw sugar at say $3 a hundred, there were a 7 per cent, waste 
in refining, this loss would amount to 21 cents a hundred; while 
if at the same 7 per cent, waste the price of raw sugar were 
$4 a hundred, the waste would amount to 28 cents. It is clear, 



394 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

therefore, that in order to make the same profit the margin 
should be 7 cents a hundred more with raw sugar at $4 a hun- 
dred than at $3 a hundred. 

Frequently, too, it happens that there is unusually vigorous 
competition and a consequent low margin each year from 
December to March, while the Louisiana crop is being refined 
and marketed. This, however, does not appear with any regu- 
larity. Likewise, the influence of vigorous competition upon the 
price of raw sugar should be noted at times. Whenever the 
crop is somewhat short, this not merely has the tendency to 
increase the price on account of the normal scarcity, but it is 
just at those times that competition is most vigorous. 

The lines X and Y on the diagram ought also to be noted 
with some care. The line X represents the world's production 
in sugar, each unit at the ends of the diagram representing 
2,000,000 long tons of 2,240 pounds each. The dotted line Y 
represents the total consumption of sugar in the United States, 
each unit at the ends of the diagram representing 1,000,000 
long tons. In order to have the distances from the base of the 
chart to X represented on the same scale as the distance to Y, 
X should be elevated to twice its present distance, thus going 
far beyond the diagram. 

This large increase in the amount of sugar consumed, repre- 
senting, of course, the American demand, is another reason why 
there would normally be a tendency toward high prices and 
quite possibly also something of a tendency toward an increase 
in the margin during late years, although this increase scarcely 
appears. 

This influence of increased consumption is shown still more 
strikingly by the increased per capita consumption of sugar 
from 49.95 pounds in 1885 to 81.80 pounds in 1909, — more 
than in any other country except England, as shown in a table 
in Appendix G. With this continuing desire for more and 
more sugar on the part of each person in the community, we 
might expect a tendency toward an increase in price. 

With these general considerations in mind, we may note now 
from the line C something of the influence of combination upon 
prices. 

Beginning with the year 1885, we see that during the years 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 395 

1885, 1886 and 1887 — and substantially the same conditions 
had existed before — there was a low margin, averaging not 
very much above .5 or ,6 of a cent a pound part of the time, as 
in the latter half of 1885, — a fall distinctly below the margin 
that had existed for several years before. This decidedly low 
margin was due, of course, to vigorous competition among the 
independent refiners. From the testimony given by witnesses 
before the Industrial Commission, this competition was so 
destructive in its nature that a large percentage of the American 
refineries, 18 out of about 40, went into bankruptcy. 

In the latter part of 1887 the sugar trust was formed. The 
margin was immediately raised more than Vi cent a pound, at 
times even fully 1 cent. During the year 1888 and most of 
1889 it will be noted that the margin was at no time less than 
1 cent a pound, at times it was more than IV2 cents, and it 
probably averaged not far from 1% cents. When one takes into 
account the lessened cost of refining and of distribution that 
come from the organization of the combination, it is fair to judge 
that the trust made enormous profits. In the latter part of 
1889 some large competing refineries, especially those built by 
Claus Spreckles at Philadelphia, entered the field, and vigorous 
competition began. The margin fell immediately to about the 
point where it had stood before the organization of the trust, 
from .6 to % of a cent a pound. This vigorous competition con- 
tinued for rather more than two years, until in February, 1 892, 
the trust bought up the competing refineries, when the margin at 
once went back to more than 1 cent a pound, substantially at the 
same point that it had been held during the noncompetitive 
period, 1888 and 1889. From 1892 to 1899 the margin re- 
mained on the whole high, with a gradual lessening toward the 
latter part of this period. Presumably this lessening was due 
in part to improvements in methods of refining and distribution ; 
possibly also, according to late disclosures made before the 
United States government, to greater profits from fraudulent 
practices; and in part, probably, also to a growing realization 
of the danger of inducing new capital to enter the business, 
tempted by the great profits that the combination was making. 

It will be noted that during this period there were various 
changes in the duty on sugar, but that these changes seem to 



396 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

have had apparently only a slight temporary effect npon the 
margin, although the lessening of the duty on raw sugar by the 
McKinley tariff affected very decidedly the price of both raw 
and refined sugar to consumers. Early in 1891 a fall of about 
2 cents a pound is noticed in the price of both raw and refined 
sugars, due, of course, to this removal of the duties. It happens 
that just at that time there is something of an increase in the 
margin. In fact, it will be quite generally observed that when- 
ever there is an increase in the price of raw sugar, followed by 
a decline, there is likely on the whole to be something of an 
increase in the margin. The refiners push up the price of their 
refined sugar as soon as there is an increase in the price of the 
raw sugar ; but when the fall in raw sugar comes, they are likely 
to delay slightly the time of lowering the price of refined sugar, 
thus getting an increased profit for the time being. Such in- 
creases in profit, owing to the more rapid fall in the raw sugar 
than of the refined, may be noticed in a number of instances, for 
example, in 1893, 1896, 1901 and 1905. 

In 1898, after a period of some six years during which the 
sugar combination had had little effective competition, Arbuckle 
Brothers, Glaus Doscher and some others entered the field in a 
vigorous competition against the American Sugar Eefining Com- 
pany. Prices were immediately cut, as will be noticed on the 
diagram, so that the margin between raw and refined sugar was 
even less than % cent a pound, probably all refineries running at 
a loss for a brief period. This margin held low until 1900, when 
there was apparently, although • there was no formal union, a 
checking of the competition, all of them deciding to make a 
somewhat greater profit. From the middle of the year 1900 
on to the present time the margin has clearly been kept high 
enough so as to yield reasonable profits at least, and during 
most of the time very decided, not to say large, profits. 

It will be noted that during the last two or three years, when 
general prices have been increasing very rapidly, the price of 
sugar on the whole has not increased materially, although 
there have been two or three periods when for a brief time the 
price has gone up. When this has been the case, the reason 
has been clearly due to some temporary influence in no way 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 397 

immediately connected with the corporations. For example, in 
1900 there was a decided increase in the price of raw sugar, 
as well as in that of refined. The influence was perhaps slightly 
due to the fact that in May, 1900, the German syndicate was 
completed, with the understanding that this syndicate was to 
last until 1904. That may possibly have influenced somewhat 
the price of the German beet sugar, one of the raw sugars used 
in the United States. Doubtless a much greater influence, how- 
ever, was that the American supplies during that season ran 
short. In July, just about the time when the increase came, 
it was necessary for the Americans to do an unusual amount 
of buying. About 100,000 tons more than was usually bought 
in Europe in one season was bought at that time, and this 
additional rather sudden demand doubtless accounts for most 
of that increase in price. 

Again, in the latter part of 1904 and the early part of 1905 
there is a large increase in the price. It will be noted that at 
the beginning of this increase the margin fell, showing that it 
was not possible to put up the price of refined sugar quite so 
rapidly as the price of the raw increased; although when the 
fall in the price of raw sugar came, in 1905, it was possible to 
check the fall in refined, so that the margin increased for a brief 
time to about l 1 /^ cents a pound. 

The cause of that increase was a short beet crop in Europe. 
There was a falling off of more than 1,000,000 tons in our 
imports, as compared with the regular import, and this short 
beet crop in itself is sufficient to account for the increase in 
price. Again, in 1908 the increased price came from a drouth 
in Cuba, which resulted in a short crop in the Cuban cane 
sugar. It will be noted that during the years 1907, 1908 and 
1909 the margin has been on the whole less than before, so 
that there can be none of the increased cost of living during 
the last three years ascribed to the influence of the sugar 
combination. 

A study of the diagram, especially when we compare the 
American with the German margin, seems to show clearly that 
the sugar combination has had the power of determining for 
itself within considerable limits what the price of sugar should 



398 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

be, low or high, with or without competitors; although during 
the two or three periods when there has been the most vigorous 
competition it chose to cut prices in order to enable it to buy 
out its rivals rather than run the risk of letting them gradually 
take its market on account of its high prices. At the time of 
the Spreckles competition this policy was directly successful, 
and the trust succeeded in buying up its competitors and then 
again raising its margin so that it could make enormous profits. 

On the other hand, the same policy followed in 1898, at the 
time of the Arbuckle-Doscher competition, did not have directly 
the same result. It seems evident enough that, even though 
its rivals may not have sold out to the combination, there was 
more or less of an understanding that the competition should be 
checked. The price was regularly announced every day by 
the American Sugar Refining Company, and the prices as 
aiinounced by that company are understood to be the regular 
market prices followed by all of the refiners. From the time 
of the organization of the trust, in 1887, for twelve or thirteen 
years the trust kept the margin high for more than three- 
quarters of the time. Since that period the margin, it will be 
noted, has steadily remained considerably higher than during 
the period of most vigorous competition in the few years pre- 
ceding the organization of the trust, and during the two periods 
of vigorous competition since that time. 

The diagram seems to show that the sugar trust has had 
little if any effect toward steadying prices. The fluctuations 
in the price of sugar and in the margin seem to be as frequent 
and as great on the whole since the formation of the combina- 
tion as before; and these fluctuations are clearly greater than 
those in the German market, and it may be said that they are 
also somewhat greater than those in the English market. 

At the times when the sugar combination has been investi- 
gated by the Industrial Commission and other governmental 
agents, the assertion has been frequently made that the price 
of sugar would have been higher if it had not been for the for- 
mation of the trust. It is not certain but that this assertion 
seems to have a partial justification in the figures printed and 
in the diagram. The diagram does make it perfectly clear 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 399 

that during the periods of the most vigorous competition the 
sugar refineries did their work on a very low margin. More- 
over, when we consider that during the years immediately 
preceding the organization of the trust, 18 out of some 40 
refineries failed, the implication seems clear that the margin 
was ruinously low, and that, although the weakest competitors 
were forced out of business, the presumption is that so much 
good capital was wasted that there was a decided injury to the 
country. When an industry is of the nature of sugar refining, 
one requiring the investment of large capital in order that 
production may be carried on economically, — a capital of per- 
haps $2,000,000 or $3,000,000 for a single refinery of the best 
type, — we can see that it is possible for competitors of 
substantially equal strength to carry on their fight until all of 
them are running at a loss for a considerable period before 
finally several of them fail. If business is carried on under 
such circumstances, it is certain that whenever there comes a 
failure of several of the competitors, or whenever instead of 
failure there comes a combination of rivals, prices will be 
put back to a figure decidedly above the competitive rates, in 
order that the great losses may be recouped. Unrestricted com- 
petition among powerful rivals in an industry of this character 
would thus lead, it would seem, to very great fluctuations in 
prices as the years go by, from those abnormally not to say 
ruinously low, to those abnormally high. If, on the other hand, 
there is more or less of an understanding among the refiners, 
it is probable that prices will be somewhat steadier, and the 
margin a medium one between the lowest and the highest. 

There can be no doubt that the sugar combination has at 
various times been able to influence prices with, relatively 
speaking, little reference to the cost of refining; but it seems 
also clear that, although they have made excellent profits during 
the last few years, the margin certainly during the last three 
or four years can hardly be said to be abnormal. It should be 
remembered that, with this decreasing margin, there can be no 
doubt that the cost of refining during the last two or three years 
has quite materially increased. The cost of materials used in 
building refineries and the cost of boneblack have both increased. 



400 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

There has also been a tendency for wages to increase, and it 
is probable that the cost of refining is as much as 8 or 10 cents 
a hundred more than it was during the period of low prices in 
the late 90's or in the first three or four years of the present 
century. 

2. Petroleum. 

In considering Diagram II., showing the prices of crude and 
refined petroleum and the margin of difference between these, 
indicating the cost of refining plus the profit, it should be 
noticed that the figures for crude oil are given in bulk per 
gallon, the package not being included in the price, whereas 
those for refined oil are given per gallon, including the cost 
per barrel, which is usually reckoned at 2 x /2 cents per gallon. 
The cost of the barrel to the company would of course vary 
slightly, but 2V2 cents per gallon is the amount regularly reck- 
oned in the " Handbook of Petroleum," and is probably a fair 
general average. This is in accordance with the usual system 
of quoting these prices. 

Taking the diagram as a whole, and noting the prices of both 
crude and refined oils as well as the margin, it is seen that this 
margin shown by line C represents the perpendicular distance 
between line B showing the price of crude petroleum, and line 
A showing the price of refined petroleum. This margin dropped 
much more rapidly during the early years of the industry than 
in the last twenty years. This is of course to be expected. 
During the early years of the industry the methods of produc- 
tion naturally improved very rapidly, so that the cost of 
production was lowered. The general process of refining may 
be considered to have been thoroughly established in say 1877, 
1878 and 1879, so that since that time the improvements have 
not so much lessened the cost as established the quality and 
lessened the cost of distribution. Many other improvements 
have of course been made, but these have been mostly in securing 
a better use of the materials formerly wasted, which now have 
become by-products whose manufacture is often very profitable. 
It would doubtless be practicable, if there were vigorous com- 
petition, to consider the cost of refining as much less than at an 
earlier period, on account of the profit from these by-products, 
even though the actual cost of refining itself had not materially 









--»—»*:.»' 









1 





















1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 401 

lessened, if indeed it has lessened at all. The diagram and the 
figures, however, take no account of the by-products, that not 
being practicable, but show merely the prices of crude and 
refined oil. 

There has been since about 1872 more or less of an association 
among the oil refiners who have made the Standard Oil Com- 
pany. Mr. Rockefeller and some of his associates who afterward 
became the Standard Oil Company, had indeed started co-oper- 
ative work as early as 1867 ; but it was not until 1872 that there 
had become any close association, and, indeed, it was not until 
the latter part of the 70's or early in the 80's that the Standard 
Oil Company had really secured control of a large portion of 
its competitors. This early association did not affect the margin 
so much as did the improved methods of production, but the 
margin kept steadily decreasing until about 1879 or 1880. 
The Standard Oil Trust was formed in 1882. From that time 
on for a period of eight or nine years there was only a slight 
decrease in the margin. For one or two years, about 1893 and 
1894, the margin was considerably lower, the smallest margin 
having been in the year 1894, shortly after the dissolution, as 
a result of a court decision, of the Standard Oil Trust. 

After the organization of the Pure Oil Company in 1895 
there was a decided decrease in the price of refined oil, which 
continued until 1898, but there was little decrease in the 
margin. The Pure Oil Company claims that the decisive fall 
of the price of refined oil in New York in 1896 was due to its 
competition. In March of that year it put some wagons on 
the streets in New York, selling oil. The prices dropped very 
rapidly, until Mr. Lee, the active man in the Pure Oil Com- 
pany, says that they were really below cost. Mr. Archbold of 
the Standard Oil Company hardly agrees with that, but does 
recognize the fact that there was active competition at that time. 
It will be noted that during the years since 1899 the margin 
seems on the whole to have lessened gradually, reaching in 
1907-08 a point lower than at any other time excepting 1894, 
while the price of crude oil has most of the time ruled high. 

It is quite probable, too. that there has been an added cost of 
refining, coming from the increased cost of supplies. Refineries 
are constructed largely of iron, and deterioration in them is 



402 COST OF LIVING. [xWay, 

rapid. Since 1899 there has been a decided increase in the 
price of iron for a considerable part of the time, the price 
at times being more than double what it was for some years 
preceding that period, although for several years lower than in 
1899-1900. Moreover, during the years 1899-1900 there was 
an increase amounting perhaps at times to as much as V2 cent 
a gallon in the cost of the packages in which the refined oil is 
carried, and the price of acids was also increased. Some of 
these prices have since then lowered. Again, as is well known, 
the cost of labor for several years in the past has been higher. 
We should not forget, also, that an increased price of crude 
oil would in itself justify some increase in the margin. As 
was explained in connection with sugar refining, any waste of 
the raw material from refining is more expensive as the price 
of that material increases, and in addition to this the amount of 
circulating capital invested in the raw material increases with 
the price of that material, so that the added loss of interest 
must likewise be taken into consideration. Taking all these 
things into account, there can be little doubt that part of this 
decrease in the margin during the last ten years may properly 
be ascribed to an increased cost of refining, thus lessening some- 
what the profits. 

As an offset to this of course should be noted, what has been 
mentioned before, an increase in the value of the by-products, 
which would permit a lowering of the price of oil without loss, 
although it is doubtless for the interests of the company, and 
naturally, that the two should be divorced as far as possible. 

The independent oil producers have said much about the 
arbitrary acts of the Standard Oil Company in fixing the prices 
of crude oil. The charge of arbitrary action by the Standard 
Oil Company was conceded by its witnesses before the Indus- 
trial Commission to be true in special cases. That organization 
in special localities has at times raised the prices of crude oil, 
until it has ruined a rival pipe line for the transportation of the 
crude oil which was also a buyer of that oil. Then, on the 
absorption of this line the price has again been lowered, to 
the great disadvantage of the oil well owners. Again, at times 
where the Standard has been almost the sole buyer of crude 
oil, it has kept prices so low that well owners have been practi- 



1910.] HOUSE -No. 1750. 403 

cally compelled to sell out to it before the price was raised. 
Most of these instances, however, have had to do with special 
localities, and produced no great effect on the entire market, 
though they have doubtless been enough to add decidedly to the 
profits of the Standard Oil Company. 

The greater general changes in the price of crude oil, which 
affected also the prices of refined oil, have been brought about 
by other causes. The discovery of the very productive fourth 
sand oil wells in Butler County, Pa., only about 80 feet below 
the third sand levels, led to a great increase in production and 
to the consequent rapid fall in price noted on the diagram in 
1873 and 1874. It was claimed by Mr. Lee that the fall of the 
two preceding years was brought about by the general demorali- 
zation in the oil business caused by the relations of the railroads 
with the South Improvement Company, one of the predecessors 
of the Standard Oil Company and its successors. Moreover, 
the year 1873, it will be recalled, was a panic year. The 
checking of the flow of oil during the next three years raised 
the price in 1875 and 1876, as is noted on the diagram, 
though the refined increased much more than the crude. Then 
the discovery of the famous Bradford oil fields in 1876 led to 
the great decline of 1877 and 1878. The depression noticed 
in 1890-92 in the price of crude oil was caused by the discovery 
of the MacDonald field in Allegheny County, Pa., with some of 
the largest wells ever known in the country, The sudden rise 
in 1895 seems to have been due to the discovery of the fact that 
the amount of oil on hand and the production were declining 
very rapidly, as compared with the demand and to the desire 
to get stocks ahead, It is probable that some of the refineries 
had sold ahead beyond their capacity to supply from any stock 
which they had on hand. The advance in crude oil was largely 
thought to be arbitrary, 'and intended perhaps to squeeze these 
independent refineries. Whatever the exact cause, there is no 
doubt that there was an urgent demand on a short supply, and 
that the market was largely speculative for a time. 

The rise in 1898 and 1899 is doubtless due to another check 
in the output. It is probable that the price would have con- 
tinued high from that time on, had it not been for the still 
further new discoveries of the oil fields of Kansas, Texas and 



404 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



California. In 1904, for the first time, more petroleum was 
produced in the United States west than east of the Mississippi 
Eiver. 

It will thus be seen that, aside from any influence which the 
Standard Oil Company has brought to bear upon the market, 
the fundamental cause leading to the fluctuations has doubtless 
been the supply of crude oil, which is largely dependent upon 
the discovery of new fields, and the steady, sometimes very 
rapid, exhaustion of the old fields. And yet the history of the 
petroleum industry seems to show also that the Standard Oil 
Company has beyond doubt been able to affect very materially, 
sometimes even almost arbitrarily, for short times, the prices 
of both refined and crude oil. During the year 1903 there was 
a noteworthy increase in the wholesale prices of refined oil. 
During the years 1904-05 there was a rather decided decrease. 
The diagram shows that the decrease in the price of crude oil 
until 1905 was not quite so great as that of the refined, so that 
the profits, unless the cost of refining had decreased more than 
proportionately, were somewhat lower, in spite of the high price 
of refined. During 1909 a rather sudden drop in the price of 
crude oil leaves the margin at the close a little higher, even 
though the price of the refined is also distinctly lower. 

Judging from the margin of profit shown in the diagram, 
the increased cost of living in recent years cannot be ascribed 
to the Standard Oil Company. 



Estimated Percentage of Standard Oil Production of Crude Oil to Total Pro- 
duction of Crude Oil in the United States. 



Yeah. 


Percentage. 


Year. 


Percentage. 


1900 


31.03 


1905, 


10.82 


1901, 


26.94 


1906 


11.22 


1902 


20.13 


1907 


10.48 


1903 


17.20 


1908 


10.43 


1904 


14.03 


1909 


10.82 



1910/ 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



405 



Estimated Percentage of Standard Oil Production of Illuminating Oil to To- 
tal Annual American Output of Illuminating Oil. 



Year. 


Percentage. 


Year. 


Percentage. 


1900 

1901 

1902 

1903 

1904 


90.13 
90.55 
89.48 
87.69 

87.14 


1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909, 


86.89 
85.40 
85.16 
84.64 
81.62 



Estimated Percentage of Standard Oil Production of Illuminating Oil to To- 
tal World Production of Illuminating Oil. 



Year. 


Percentage. 


Year. 


Percentage. 


1900 


51.89 


1905 


53.93 


1901 


53.04 


1906 


50.88 


1902 


52.71 


1907, 


48.93 


1903 


44.35 


1908 


52.71 


1904 


43.47 


1909 


49.67 



3. Whiskey. 
A study of line C in Diagram III., showing the difference 
between the price of the raw material, corn, per bushel, and 
the price less the revenue tax of the amount of the finished 
product, spirits, derived from one bushel of corn, shows nothing 
more clearly than the very great fluctuations in this marginal 
difference. The price of corn, owing to variations of the crops 
and to various factors which determine demand, fluctuates 
greatly from season to season. For a good many years during 
the time that the Distilling and Cattle Feeding Company, the 
successor of the earlier whiskey trust, was in the hands of the 
receiver, General McNulta, the price of spirits was based 
directly upon that of corn, and fluctuated with it ; but whether 
the price is directly based upon corn, or not, it is likely to be 
affected largely by that price. During the years 1881-87 
various pools were formed among distillers, most of which lasted 
but a short time, generally less than a year. The distillers 
entering into these pools as a rule agreed to limit their output 



406 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

to a certain per cent, of the normal output of their distilleries, 
sometimes to not more than 50 or 60 per cent. Usually also 
there were certain agreements regarding price. The diagram 
shows clearly that during the existence of each pool the prices 
of alcohol were kept up, and the profits, as shown by line C, 
were correspondingly large. When, however, some untrust- 
worthy distiller began to sell secretly at cut prices or to increase 
his output beyond the per cent, agreed upon, and in consequence 
the pool suspended, profits fell to a minimum, doubtless at 
times below the cost of distilling. 

Immediately after the formation of the whiskey trust, in 
1.887, prices were cut for a time, in order, as the organizers of 
the trust did not hesitate to say, to force their competitors 
into the organization ; but within a few months, the rivals hav- 
ing been largely bought up or destroyed, the profits, as shown 
in 1888, became very large. These profits stimulating com- 
petition, however, it became necessary at the beginning of 
1889 to cut prices again very decidedly, in order to force 
rivals into the combination. It was during this period also 
that the decisions of the courts rendered the legal form of 
the whiskey trust doubtful, and early in 1900 it was reorgan- 
ized as a single corporation. For some two or three years after 
this change the price and profits were kept on the whole fairly 
high; but in 1892 a period of speculation led to startling- 
sudden changes in prices and corresponding changes in profits, 
so far as any sales were actually made. At times of course with 
these very high prices sales were very small. From the years 
1890-95 certain rebates were paid to wholesalers. The diagram 
attempts to show the prices with these rebates deducted, instead 
of giving during this period the quoted market prices ; but one 
cannot be entirely sure of the accuracy of the diagram in regard 
to this, since it has been impossible to secure with absolute 
certainty the dates of the various rebates. The diagram is, 
however, doubtless substantially accurate. 

In 1894, owing apparently in part to speculation, in part to 
competition or bad management, the conditions of the industry 
became bad ; the prices of spirits were cut very low ; the margin 
of profits entirely disappeared, and the Distilling and Cattle 
Feeding Company, the so-called trust, went into the hands of a 



I 



£W 




1882 


















1891 
















1899 












































I 






1 
















; 


















« 


. « 




1 






| 








cs 






$ 


J: 1 








^ 






I 


















< 


1 ! 




1 












* 


J 






*>* 


i * 








! 






I 1 












_T 


A 




^ 


VI Ct 




^ 


n 




r 




n 




? 


1 




1 
1 


5 i 


v I 








r 




^ 




















a/ 


r \j\ 




V 




/ 


-V 




J 




^ / 


r\ 


\ 1 


1 




^ « 








.!> 




^ 




\ 


A 


r 












6 \ 






\ 




i\ 


1 


/ 


jj 


/i 


K 


V 


A- A 




M 


A 








r 


<5 


V 




<s 


1/ 


\ 


,/ 




v 


yv 


c 








A/*v 


4^1/ 

i V 


At 


^ 


i 

i , 


j 






; s 


N 


I ^ 




A A 


/ 


^V 




-v^ 


-^ 

-^v. 






vx 


yr 


Ay 


e 




c 

c/ 


\I1 




l r 


u 


-^Jv- 


\< 


^ \ 


Vy— 


'Jj y 


v/ v 




U 


i 




^\/-- 




/ 7 


w V 


A/ 






L' 


\ 


/ 














V 




v' 




















W v 


u 


/^ 



























t 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 407 

receiver. Since the formation of the American Spirits Manu- 
facturing Company, in 1895, the business seems on the whole 
to have been considerably more stable than at any preceding 
period, even during the best years of the Distilling and Cattle 
Feeding Company. Generally throughout this whole period 
from 1895 to date we may note a rather close correspondence 
between the prices of grain and of spirits, although at no time 
do the margin of cost of distilling and the profits run anywhere 
nearly so low as during the bankrupt years of 1894 and 1895. 
Nevertheless, the year 1897 shows a lower margin of profit 
than at any time preceding or following, with the exception of 
the bankrupt years just mentioned. 

From the time of the reorganization of the company, after 
it had been in the hands of the receiver, in the various forms 
which united the interests of the different establishments which 
were formerly rivals or which supplemented in a single organi- 
zation the work of one another by controlling different parts of 
the business, there seems to have been a steady improvement in 
conditions. Although there was a fairly regular increase in the 
price of corn from 1897 to 1901, the price of spirits increased 
even more rapidly on the whole, so that the profits were, with 
here and there an exception, maintained. The general condition 
of the business is well indicated in a circular of April 30, 1903, 
issued by President Curley of the Distillers' Securities Corpora- 
tion, the new organization that had taken the place of the 
Distilling Company of America. He says that the earnings 
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1903, would show a sub- 
stantial surplus ; that the demand for their products was steadily 
increasing, the condition of the business fully justifying the 
expectation that the net profits would continue to show satis- 
factory annual increases. The assets of the company included 
not only valuable real estate and excellent manufacturing piants, 
but in addition to these properties there were extremely valuable 
trade marks also represented by stock. Mr. Curley claimed that 
this great enterprise differed from many of the other consolida- 
tions of industrial enterprises, including the earlier whiskey 
combination, in not seeking a practical monopoly which would 
invariably lead to the establishment of new competitive plants. 
He claimed that these constituent companies had already gone 



408 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

through this phase of monopoly, and since 1899, the time of the 
Distilling Company of America, had conducted a business in 
open competition, free from artificial combinations to control 
prices, so that the progress which they had made was sound 
and substantial. He thought that through the large volume of 
their business and their financial resources they could pur- 
chase supplies more advantageously than could individual com- 
petitors, and they could likewise distribute their products at 
minimum cost. All of these advantages combined to increase 
their profits, thus enabling their companies to make larger 
returns, while maintaining a low market price for their output. 

Soon after the middle of the year 1903, however, came a 
very decided cut in the price of their product, although there 
was no corresponding fall in the price of corn. In his annual 
report for the year ending June 30, 1904, the president called 
attention to the fact that from the outset of the fiscal year 
trade conditions in all manufacturing branches were unsettled, 
and a feeling of apprehension prevailed. The large demand for 
manufacturing products had not been maintained. He added 
that, while conditions in the whiskey industry had been in the 
main satisfactory, this company, the Distillers' Securities Cor- 
poration, had not escaped entirely from the general reaction; 
and they had therefore thought it advisable to pursue a con- 
servative policy respecting output by curtailing to some extent 
the production of cheaper grades of goods on which the profit 
is very small, and devoting the bulk of operations to the higher 
grades. While the total sales were somewhat less than those of 
the preceding year, the percentage of gross earnings, he said, 
had been practically maintained. The cut in prices near the 
middle of the year was followed by a sharp recovery in the early 
part of 1904; but later in 1904 occurred another sharp decline. 
Apparently there was a break between the Securities Corpora- 
tion's subsidiary company (the Standard Distilling and Distrib- 
uting Company) and the independent distillers, which occurred 
late in September. This resulted in another decided fall in the 
price of domestic spirits. The cut in price was openly an- 
nounced and confirmed by an official circular, stating that the 
lower price would be maintained until further notice. 

These cuts in prices and the presence of vigorous competition 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 409 

is announced in somewhat guarded terms in the report of 
President Curley, at the close of the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1905. He claims that, with the exception of the spirit branch 
of their business, the one here considered, all the other depart- 
ments had shown an increase in net profits. The condition of 
the spirit market, however, accounted for a noteworthy difference 
in gross receipts for the year, compared with those of the year 
preceding, and also for the decrease in net profits. He adds : — 

The management some time since determined upon a course which 
would lead outside spirit distillers to realize that certain well-consid- 
ered business methods should be pursued by all engaged in that branch. 
Accordingly, this company has so conducted its spirit department as 
to result in the adoption of a businesslike and conservative course by 
distillers. The fact that this company has other avenues of income 
from these various other branches — an advantage possessed by no 
other concern — has been a potent factor in this connection. Since 
May of this year the profits of the spirit department have again become 
normal, and if they continue as they are, — and it is believed they will 
during the current year, — the net profits will show a considerable 
advance over the figures for the year just closed. 

This apparently means that they had forced their competi- 
tors to maintain prices. In order to carry out this policy, and 
reduce expenses, one of the subsidiary companies, the Standard 
Distilling and Distributing Company, was dissolved. 

The improvement in the conditions noted following May, 
1905, appears clearly in the diagram in the line illustrating the 
increase in the price of spirits, and no less notably in that 
illustrating the margin of profits. From this time on the general 
policy of the company seems to have been maintained. We 
note in the year 1906 and again in 1908 a steadiness of price 
covering a period of some months, which seems to indicate a 
substantial control of market conditions. The reports of the 
company show an increase in profits and a slight increase in 
dividends, and apparently a somewhat stable dividend-paying 
policy. 

The diagram shows in these later years something of the 
influence of the combination on prices which was noted more 
particularly in earlier years ; but from the nature of the indus- 
try, the ease of making competition with relatively small capital, 



410 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

there is not manifest from the diagram the same control of the 
market that appears in the case of the steel companies. This, 
indeed, is hardly to be expected. 

4. Ieox and Steel. 

The three diagrams representing the iron and steel trades 
show in a very striking way the influence of pools and industrial 
combinations in a number of instances, the influence at some 
times seeming apparently very unfavorable to the consuming 
public, at other times favorable. There is perhaps nothing in 
any of the diagrams to indicate that the combinations have had 
any material effect in increasing the cost of living during the 
last few years, especially the last two years. It is nevertheless 
of material importance to note the effects of the combinations, 
whether favorable or unfavorable. 

Nails and Wire. — On Diagram IV. we find illustrated the 
price of steel billets (D), which, for our purposes, may be con- 
sidered the raw material, together with the price of wire nails 
(C), that of smooth wire (B) and that of galvanized barb wire 
(A). The line E represents the margin between steel billets 
and wire nails. Inasmuch as during the last few years, since 
the organization of the United States Steel Corporation, the 
fluctuations in smooth wire, barb wire and wire nails have been 
quite similar, it has been thought best not to render the diagram 
confusing by multiplying the number of these original lines. 

If we note this line E carefully, we shall see that during the 
earlier period presented, especially from the years 1890 to 1895, 
there was a steady decline in the margin as well as in the price 
of both steel billets and wire nails, the fall in the price of nails 
being more rapid than in that of steel billets, until, in 1894 and 
the early part of 1895, the cost of production plus the profit of 
the nails if figured on this basis amounted to not much more 
than 25 cents a hundred pounds. 

During the latter part of 1895 there was a very sudden and 
rapid rise not merely in the price of wire nails but also in the 
margin, showing a very decided increase in profits. A second 
rise, although not so great, was made in the earlier part of 1896, 
the margin also increasing almost proportionately. It will be 
noted also that there was a slight increase in the price. of steel 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 411 

billets, but no large increase, — nothing that in any way corre- 
sponded to the very rapid increase in the price of wire nails, 
and this price soon lessened. This great increase in the price as 
well as in the profit was caused by the formation of the wire 
nail pool. It seems clear that the makers of this pool did not 
expect to be able to hold their monopoly for any great length of 
time, and that in consequence they thought it best to push their 
advantage as hard as possible for the time being, feeling certain 
that in the not distant future competitors would come into the 
field, so that their prices would again need to fall. It takes time, 
of course, to build new competing plants; and in the case of 
industries such as those of steel a well-organized pool can, if it 
wishes, practically control the market for a considerable length 
of time. Their prices increased rapidly from $1.45 a hundred 
to $1.68, to $2.25, to $2.55, where it held for six months, before 
the break came. At the end of that time, after some eighteen 
months of practical monopoly, competitors had succeeded in pro- 
viding facilities for manufacture, so that the pool was broken 
and prices fell back to a competitive rate, though not so low as 
they had been before the organization of the pool. It seems 
probable that the boldness of the pool managers in pushing prices 
so high even extended the time of the monopoly. Competitors 
enough to break the pool would have arisen sooner, had not each 
one anticipated its speedy collapse on account of its high prices 
promising enormous profits. Each believed that some one else 
must very soon enter the field. 

Even after the break in the wire nail pool, the margin during 
the years 1897 and 1898 remained considerably higher than it 
had been for three years before the formation of the pool, with, 
however, a slight decline. It seems probable that the margin 
during the years before the formation of the pool had been so 
low that the business was really unprofitable. 

In January, 1899, the American Steel and Wire Company, 
which controlled from 65 per cent, to at times even as high as 
95 per cent, of the output of wire nails, was formed. Moreover, 
at the beginning of 1899 there came a very strong and rapidly 
increasing demand for steel products of all kinds. The price of 
steel billets and pig iron as the raw material and the price of all 
kinds of steel manufactures rose very rapidly in consequence. 



412 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Even then it was not possible for manufacturers to meet fully the 
demand. It will be noted that the margin of profit on steel nails 
increased also readily, although not quite so rapidly as did the 
price of steel billets. Besides the increase in profit which doubt- 
less was made by the American Steel and Wire Company, there 
was also an increase in the cost of production of nails that 
explains part of this increase in the margin. First, there had 
been a decided increase in the wages of the laborers engaged in 
the manufacture of wire and wire nails. From testimony given 
before the Industrial Commission, this increase in wages among 
workers in this class was greater than that among the laborers 
engaged in the manufacture of steel billets, so that this would 
normally bring about more increase in the margin. 

Another reason for the increase in the margin is the addi- 
tional cost of waste. There is always, of course, a considerable 
waste in turning the raw material, steel billets, into wire and 
wire nails. If, for example, the loss were 5 per cent, in the 
case of steel valued at $15 a ton, it would amount to 75 
cents; whereas, if steel were $30 a ton, the loss would be 
$1.50. During this period of increased prices steel more than 
doubled in price. In consequence, with the same profit, the 
margin should have increased quite noticeably. On the whole, 
however, both from the diagram and from outside testimony, 
there can be no doubt that the wire company decidedly increased 
its profits during this period of the rise in price. 

In October, 1899, occurred a fall in the price of steel bil- 
lets ; but, while the price of nails was put down a little, shortly 
afterward another increase followed, so that during the early 
part of 1900 the profits again increased. 

It is fair to say that, even without any combination on the 
part of the manufacturers, there would in all probability have 
been a decided increase not merely in the price of the finished 
product, but also in the margin between the crude and the fin- 
ished product, on account of the enormous demand. The testi- 
mony seemed to be uniform that none of the manufacturers in 
any of these finished products of steel were able to meet the 
demand. It seems likely, however, that the combination was 
able to take advantage of the opportunity rather better than the 
individual manufacturers could have done. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 413 

While the diagram represents the general market conditions 
as they were furnished to the " Iron Age," it is probable that 
they do not represent with entire accuracy the actual conditions 
in the steel trade. Each manufacturer made his sales independ- 
ently, and these sales were frequently made by contracts extend- 
ing over a period of some months. In the case of some contracts, 
such as those for rails or beams, the period was sometimes as 
long as from one to two years. In consequence of that business 
custom, the majority of the manufacturers of steel might well 
have been furnishing their output on a contract price fixed six 
months before, while a few manufacturers making late sales 
might have been obtaining a price 50 per cent, higher. On the 
other hand, during the first half of the year 1899 probably the 
market prices were considerably higher than those actually real- 
ized by the manufacturers. When the sharp fall in prices came, 
early in 1900, of course the situation was reversed, and some 
manufacturers were delivering output at a price decidedly above 
that quoted in the market. Taking all of these circumstances 
into account, it seems nevertheless true that the diagram through- 
out represents fairly well the changing conditions of business 
during the period covered. 

The very high prices of 1899 led, as was to be expected, of 
course, to the usual result. The very great demand followed by 
the high prices gradually slackened, while the production con- 
tinued until there were large stocks in many instances on the 
market. The awakening to the new situation came very sud- 
denly. In April the chairman of the American Steel and Wire 
Company suddenly ordered a shutdown of a number of mills of 
that company, and, in addition to that, gave expression to a num- 
ber of pessimistic opinions regarding the state of the steel trade, 
saying that he thought the trade was in a very dangerous condi- 
tion. Naturally, sharp declines in prices followed not merely in 
nails, but in smooth wire, barb wire and in all other lines of 
products. The declines were followed promptly by others, and 
yet there was a decided stagnation in the market. The decline 
in steel billets, that had begun in the latter part of 1899, con- 
tinued through most of the year 1900. The large profits shown 
in wire nails declined promptly ; but, as the price of steel billets 
continued to go down after the fall in the price of nails was 



414 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

checked, the margin rose again and continued high until the 
increasing price of steel billets in 1901 and 1902 brought the 
margin back again to about the position where it had been after 
the breaking of the nail pool in 1896. and before the formation 
of the steel and wire company in 1899. With more or less 
fluctuations, the margin has remained through the changing 
prices of steel billets and nails much the same from 1902 and 
1903 until the present time. 

The Carnegie Company was organized in 1900, and its new 
reorganization was followed in the early part of 1901 by the 
organization of the United States Steel Corporation, an organi- 
zation which took over not merely the Carnegie Company and 
the American Steel and Wire Company, but also a number of 
other leading manufacturers of finished steel of various kinds. 
The policy of the United States Steel Corporation appears in 
the prices not merely of steel nails, but perhaps even in a more 
striking way, as it appears on the diagram, in the prices of barb 
wire and smooth wire. It will be noted that the prices of both 
barb wire (line A) and smooth wire (line B), the second line 
beginning only in 1895, have since 1895 followed very steadily 
the prices of steel billets. Before that date the price of barb 
wire, as in the case of wire nails, was falling more rapidly than 
that of steel billets. In very many cases the fluctuations seem 
to go almost regularly with the price of the billets. Since the 
organization of the Steel and Wire Company, in 1899, fol- 
lowed by that of the Carnegie Company and then that of the 
United States Steel Corporation, there comes a decided change 
in the appearance of these lines on the diagram. It will be 
noted that the price once established is likely to be maintained 
for a period of some months without any change; that there 
comes then a sudden change, either up or down, and the price 
is again maintained in some instances for nearly two years. 
Although these prices correspond in a general way to the prices 
of steel billets, those prices vary almost from month to month, 
while the prices of these finished products change much less 
often. 

It will be noted that the price of neither smooth wire nor of 
barb wire followed regularly the price of wire nails at the time 
of the wire nail pool, in 1895-96, although there was a sudden 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 415 

increase in the price of barb wire, followed by an immediate 
decline. 

Through the ownership of patents, the American Steel and 
Wire Company, now owned by the United States Steel Corpora- 
tion, has a legal monopoly in barb wire, so that we should expect 
a wide margin between the price of steel billets and of barb 
wire. It is possible that this margin, which is so much wider 
than that between the billets and either smooth wire or wire 
nails, is due in part to an increased cost of manufacture ; but 
it is probably due more to this legal monopoly, coming from 
the ownership and combination of the different patents. 
Although the difference between the price of barb wire and of 
steel billets increased very rapidly during 1899 and the earlier 
part of 1900, its increase was not much more rapid than that 
in the price of wire nails and of smooth wire. There can be 
little doubt that the great increase in the price of all these prod- 
ucts was at that time due chiefly to the increase in the price of 
raw material, and the strong demand. The combination, how- 
ever, seems to have enabled its managers to make the best use 
of its opportunities, for the margin as well as the price in- 
creased rapidly from the date of the combination. After the 
formation of the United States Steel Corporation, however, a 
new policy seems to have been adopted, — that of maintaining 
good profits, but not extraordinary ones. The steadiness of the 
margin, as shown in line E on Diagram IV., after the forma- 
tion of the Steel Corporation, is quite noteworthy, as compared 
with the enormous fluctuations for the six or eight years pre- 
ceding. 

Steel Rails and Beams. — Turning now to Diagram V., the 
main points to be noted are the apparent effects of the organiza- 
tion of these great combinations upon the prices of steel rails and 
steel beams. It has seemed best to introduce in this diagram 
also (line B) the price of Bessemer pig iron, which is used as 
a raw material for steel billets, as represented in line A. The 
perpendicular distance between these two is represented in line 
C, indicating what might be looked upon as the cost of the 
production of steel from iron plus the profit. The line D repre- 
sents the price of steel rails. The line F represents the price 
of steel beams. The line E represents the perpendicular dif- 



416 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

ference between line B, representing Bessemer pig iron, and 
line D, representing steel rails, it seeming best in this instance 
to look upon pig iron as the raw material for the manufacture 
of steel rails; while the line G, representing the perpendicular 
distance between the lines F and A, indicates the cost of pro- 
duction plus the profits in the manufacture of steel beams from, 
the crude steel. 

It must be borne in mind, of course, that these indications 
of the margin are in the case of the manufacture of steel of 
these various kinds nowhere nearly so true an indication of the 
profits plus the cost of production as is to be found in the case 
of the margin between raw and refined sugar or crude and 
refined oil. Many more factors should be taken into considera- 
tion. Without, therefore, dwelling too emphatically upon the 
margin, there are some very interesting points to be noted as 
regards the influence of the corporations upon the prices. 

The course of prices of steel rails and of the various forms of 
structural steel — beams, plates, etc. — took the same upward 
course in the year 1899 that we have already noted in connec- 
tion with barb wire, smooth wire and wire nails. The demand 
was if anything even more insistent than for wire, and the 
margin of profit during the latter part of 1899 and especially 
during the first half of 1900 increased very rapidly. At 
substantially the same time that the break occurred in the 
wire industry came the break likewise in steel rails and struc- 
tural steel, as shown in the diagram, lines D and F. Part of 
this fall in price was doubtless a direct result of the request 
on the part of John W. Gates, chairman of the American" 
Steel and Wire Company, to delay temporarily deliveries of 
50,000 tons of steel which he had previously ordered from the 
Federal Steel Company. This delay of delivery necessitated 
the closing of the mills of the Federal Steel Company, engaged 
in filling the order, and the iron and steel markets became 
in general much unsettled. The organization of the new 
Carnegie Steel Company was effected about the middle of 
1900, but this apparently produced little if any effect upon 
prices. Early in 1901, with an increase in the price of steel 
billets and of pig iron, came also a slight recovery in the price 
of steel rails and of steel beams. Kails had fallen in the latter 



DIAGRAM V.-PRICES OF IRON AND STEEL (1898-1909 BY MONTHS;. (DOLLARS PER TON). 
I90I 1302 (903 1904 1905 190b I! 



1908 1909 




1898 189 



905 1906 1907 1908 



Steel Billets (Pittsburi 



E. Difference between 

F. Steel Beams (Phila. i 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 417 

part of 1899 and through the first half of 1900 from $35 a ton, 
where, with the exception of one month, they had been main- 
tained for nearly a year, to $20. About the time of the organi- 
zation of the United States Steel Corporation, in February, 
1901, the price was raised to $28. From that time to the pres- 
ent there has been no variation. 

This absolute maintenance of an unvarying price for steel 
rails, through a period which has now lasted some nine years, 
regardless of fluctuations in the price of pig iron, of coal, of 
ore, of wages, is perhaps the most striking manifestation of 
the power of a great industrial corporation that our history 
affords. During the brief period of strong demand and of 
increased prices in 1902 and the earlier part of 1903, when 
it would have been easily possible to increase the price of 
rails by several dollars a ton, no change was made; on the 
other hand, during the years 1903 and 1904, in the period 
of depression, when the demand was relatively small and 
the prices of other grades of iron and steel were falling, the 
price of steel rails remained unchanged. During the suc- 
ceeding years of 1905, 1906 and the early part of 1907, with 
prices in all lines rapidly increasing, with the demand for not 
merely other kinds of steel but also for steel rails rapidly on 
the increase, in some instances the demand being greater than 
could be met for prompt delivery, the corporation still refused 
to increase the price, although its smaller rivals would have 
been glad of the opportunity; and again, after the crisis of 
1907, throughout the period of depression of 1908 and further 
throughout the period of recovery of 1909, although the demand 
fell off to almost nothing after the crisis, and finally with a 
strong demand through 1909, the price has been maintained at 
the unvarying rate. 

If one were to compare the margin between the price of steel 
rails and of its normal raw material, pig iron or steel billets, it 
would appear that the marginal cost of manufacture plus the 
profits had at times increased with the fall in the price of raw 
material, and at other times had decreased rapidly, as the price 
of the raw material, iron and steel, has increased ; but it appears 
further that the Steel Corporation was determined to allow 
the railroads to rely absolutely upon one fixed price, which it 



418 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

considered reasonable, regardless of demand or of other influ- 
ences which might normally be expected to affect the prices. 

On the other hand, when one notes carefully the exact condi- 
tions under which steel rails have been produced since the organ- 
ization of the Steel Corporation, it is seen that ordinary changes 
in price of iron and steel as a matter of fact need not affect 
materially the prices of steel rails. The United States Steel 
Corporation, practically all the producers of steel rails, own 
their mines, produce their own ore, furnish their own coal and 
coke, and, in fact, supply everything needed for the production 
of steel rails. Excepting, therefore, changes in wages or pos- 
sibly in the price of some of the implements or means of pro- 
duction, such as railways, steamships, etc., it can hardly be said 
that the cost of their material varies with the market prices of 
iron or steel. If they were to determine their prices of 
steel rails by the market price of pig iron or steel billets, it 
would be for them in good part merely a matter of bookkeeping, 
and not changes really brought about by the conditions of pro- 
duction under which they are working. 

The policy which the Steel Corporation has openly an- 
nounced and which these diagrams show it has rigidly main- 
tained, — of a steady price which it considers reasonable, — 
is, it will be noted, to a very considerable extent dependent 
upon this most important fact, — that it controls also the mines 
which furnish it with practically all of its raw material. 

Steel beams, the type of structural steel which has been 
selected to represent the other type of finished product, show 
many of the same characteristics in price movement, although 
not quite so rigidly maintained. 

Diagram V., line F, shows the sudden and great increase in 
price during the year 1899 ; the maintenance of a fixed price 
of $53.76 a ton until June, 1900; then the rapid decline in 
price to $36.96 a ton; then, after the formation of the United 
States Steel Corporation, the steady maintenance of the price at 
$39.20 a ton for nearly a year. In 1902, with the increase in 
the price of steel billets, steel beams pushed rapidly up also to 
a price of more than $50 a ton ($50.82), with, however, a rapid 
decrease again in the latter part of 1902 and the earlier part 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 419 

of 1903 to a price of $38.75 a ton, where it was maintained 
until the latter part of 190-1 (September) without a change. 
During the latter part of 1903, however, and the earlier part 
of 1904, following the depression in the price of other iron and 
steel products, there was a very slack demand, and, although 
the market price was not changed, there was little steel bought. 
In order to move the market, soon after the middle of 1904 the 
Republic Iron and Steel Company made a decided cut in price, 
which was very soon followed by others. The Steel Corpora- 
tion lowered its price immediately to $35.17, then to $34.27. 
Later in that same year, however, the recovery in business 
began, and the prices soon went back to their former level. In 
the latter part of 1905 the corporation fixed its price at $40.90, 
where it remained, with only one slight change in July, 1907, 
to $41.44, until several months after the panic in November. 
In June and July, 1908, it lowered its price to $39.20, where 
it remained until March, 1909. 

After the panic of 1907 and during practically all of the 
year 1908, the United States Steel Corporation and the other 
large steel interests worked closely in harmony, in order to 
prevent absolute demoralization in prices. During the last 
few months, however, of 1908 and the beginning of 1909 it 
was clear that the consumers of iron and steel were placing 
orders only for such material as they actually needed for 
immediate use, believing that the conditions existing were arti- 
ficial, that the prices were being maintained unnaturally, and 
that they might break at any time. Beyond question many 
of the smaller manufacturers and quite possibly the Steel 
Corporation also, although openly prices were maintained, had 
been shading these prices in special instances. On February 18, 
1909, a meeting of practically all the leading steel interests 
was held in New York City. After a careful discussion of the 
market conditions, it was decided to abandon all further at- 
tempts to hold prices. The next day, Chairman Gary, speaking 
for the Steel Corporation and practically for the other interests 
as well, declared an open market. A scramble for orders began. 
The large steel interests with their magnificent selling organiza- 
tioned searched the country for orders. Structural materials of 



420 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

all kinds were reduced $6 to $7 a ton, steel bars $4 to $5, pipe 
$10 to $12, and other finished material in like proportion. The 
price of steel beams dropped to $32.03. 

These lower prices at once started orders, many of them of 
large size. This started immediately the iron mills. Prices 
immediately began to increase; heavy orders were taken, 
although until the prices improved consumers as a rule were 
not allowed to book orders for a long period ahead. In May 
and June, as the order books filled, the larger companies became 
more independent. This increased the orders still more, so 
that by October many of the plants had their full capacity in 
demand for the rest of the year and for the first quarter of 1910. 
During the last three months of 1909 the largest establishments 
were accepting business only for shipment at the convenience of 
the mill. The last half of 1909 was very satisfactory to the steel 
trade, and since that time the conditions have been favorable. 

The diagram, line F, shows clearly all these movements. The 
effect of the United States Steel Corporation on prices is noted 
particularly in the long level lines, showing that the same price 
was maintained absolutely, usually for a period of months, if 
not years ; that when the change came, it was a sudden prompt 
change to a level distinctly higher or lower, where the intention 
was to maintain the price. The shape of this line as com- 
pared with that representing the price of pig iron or steel bil- 
lets shows the power of the corporation when it chooses to exer- 
cise it. Similar phenomena would be noted were the prices of 
other finished products of the corporation listed. 

5. Tin Plate. 

Diagram VI., representing the changes in price in the tin 
plate industry, shows the influence of the corporations in deter- 
mining prices quite similar to those already noted heretofore. 
The tendency toward high prices and profits is not so noticeable 
as that toward steadiness of price and toward increased profits, 
especially at the time when the raw material is falling. 

The standard unit taken for the price of the finished material 
is one box of tin plate, 14 by 20, full weight 108 pounds. The 
raw material used for this is 1051/2 pounds of steel plus 2% 
pounds of tin. Although it is not quite accurate, it has been 






I 
ah 



DIAGRAM VI.-PRICES OF TIN PLATES 



1888 Ida? 1890 




A. Cost of 1 051 Pounds Steel Billets, Plus 21 Pounos Tin. C. Avi 

B. Cost of 1054 Pounds Steel Billets, Plus 21 Pounds Tin D. Difi 
plus Labor Cost per One Box Tin Plate. 



i Bessemer Coke Tin Plate. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 421 

thought best to take for the basic price of steel that of steel 
billets. The line C on the diagram therefore represents the 
price of the box of tin plate. The line A represents the price 
of the raw material by weight contained in such a box, although 
the steel is the unrolled steel billets. The line B represents this 
same amount of steel and tin plus the amount of labor required 
to manufacture the tin from the black plates. The cost of labor 
represents the average of a number of tin plate mills, and is 
authoritative. Although there has been no lessening of the 
wages of labor, although in fact the wages have been increasing, 
the labor cost per box, which in 1893 was $1.60, had decreased 
in 1897 to $1 ; in 1901, a year or two after the organization of 
the American Tin Plate Company, to 93 cents ; in 1906, to 82 
cents. Since then there has been a slight increase, until in 1909 
it stood at 84 cents. It will be noted that since 1893 this labor 
cost per box has decreased by nearly one-half. This average 
labor cost from 1893 to date is seen in a table in Appendix G. 
The line D on the chart represents the margin between this 
cost of raw material plus the labor and the price of the box of 
tin plate. 

It will be noted that from 1894 up until the middle of 1897, 
in spite of a decided drop in 1894, with a rapid recovery and 
another decline in the latter part of 1896, this margin between 
the cost of material and labor and the selling price of tin plate 
remained at considerably above $1 a box, sometimes amounting 
to $1.50, and averaging perhaps $1.30. During 1897 there 
was a decided decline in the price of tin plate, with a correspond- 
ing or greater decline in the margin, which continued steadily 
down until October, 1898, when it reached a point distinctly 
below $1, as low as 74 cents. 

Somewhat before the organization of the American Tin 
Plate Company, in December, 1898, there had been a decided 
increase in the price of tin plate, and this increase had been 
more than proportionate to the increase in the price of raw 
material, although that had advanced somewhat as early as 
June. It was of course known to most of the tin plate manu- 
facturers that the combination would probably be formed, and 
presumably on that account the different establishments had 
already stopped their most vigorous competition. This increase 



422 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

in the margin between cost and selling price was fixed first at 
$4,215 a box and then at $5, where it remained until the end 
of the year. 

Although our figures from January, 1900, are on a differ- 
ent base, the diagram represents accurately the conditions. 

In January, 1900, we note a decrease in price to $4.65 a box, 
a price maintained for eight months until September, 1900, 
when with one interval the price was cut to $4. This price 
was maintained without change until November, 1902, a period 
of more than two years, although a decided increase in the cost 
of raw material and labor had very decidedly lessened the profits. 
In November, 1902, there was another cut in the price. From 
1902 until the present it will be noted that the prices of tin 
plates have in the main followed the prices of the raw material, 
although the changes have not been so rapid, the prices, when 
once fixed, remaining usually unchanged for a period of nearly 
a year, while the price of raw material shifts continually. It is 
noteworthy, however, that the margin of difference since the 
formation of the Tin Plate Company, and especially since its 
absorption by the United States Steel Corporation, in 1901, has 
been steadily decidedly lower than it was for the three or four 
years preceding the organization of the American Tin Plate 
Company ; although it was at that time asserted, with perhaps no 
good ground for doubting the truth of the assertion, that it was 
chiefly the fierce competition among the tin plate manufacturers 
that led to the organization of the American Tin Plate Com- 
pany. 

The price of tin plate seems to illustrate, about the same as 
did the price of structural steel or of steel rails, the power of a 
corporation, and at the same time the readiness of the corpora- 
tion not to take advantage of its power at every opportunity, 
but to maintain on the whole steadiness of price at rates that 
do not seem unreasonable, if they are compared with those 
preceding the organization of the corporation. Of course the 
improved facilities for production coming from the magnifi- 
cent organization of the Steel Corporation and its plentiful 
capital have decidedly lessened cost, so that a lessening of the 
price of the finished product might be expected without any 
lessening of wages or of profits. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 423 

In the case of all these steel products it is interesting to 
note that, although during the latter part of 1909 there has been 
quite a decided increase in prices, this is clearly due merely to 
a recovery from the effects of the panic of 1907. For some 
years before that sudden fall there seems to have been no tend- 
ency toward a marked increase in these prices that would affect 
materially the cost of living. At no time have the prices of 
these steel products reached the level found in 1899 and the 
early part of 1900, and during most of the period they have 
been lower than in 1902. The changes, both in the way of 
increase and decrease, seem to be no greater than might be 
expected from changes in demand with the fluctuating general 
conditions of business; and, on the whole, the prices seem not 
to show an upward tendency since 1890 that corresponds to simi- 
lar increases in many other lines of industry, but rather the 
reverse. 

6. Wheat and Wool. 

After these studies of prices as they are indisputably affected 
by the Steel Corporation, the Standard Oil Company and the 
American Sugar Refining Company, it is interesting to turn 
to prices in some other lines which clearly are not affected by 
the trusts, and to note the comparison. Diagram VII. shows 
in line A the annual average price of wheat per bushel from 
1890 to 1910. No one claims of course that wheat is in any 
way controlled by any great corporation, although to be sure 
there have been certain times when for a few days a partial 
corner of the market has raised the price. The price of wheat 
is determined rather by the supply coming from large or short 
crops in different parts of the world. Starting with a price of 
about 90 cents a bushel in 1890, after an increase of some 
7 cents a bushel during the following year, there was a steady 
fall for three years, until it reached a level of only 55.8 cents, 
when, changing again for a period of four years, it again reached 
a price of 88 cents in 1898. A decrease again for two years 
brought it to 70 cents in 1900. Increases again raised the price 
to $1.04 in 1904. In 1906 it again fell to 79.3 cents, since 
which time by a regular increase it amounted to about $1.24 at 
the close of 1909. On the whole, the diagram shows a distinct 
upward tendency. The fluctuations are very decided, greater, 



424 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

as might perhaps be expected, than in the price of any of the 
products controlled by the trusts; and the increase in the cost 
of living is clearly due more to the increase in the price of wheat 
since the year 1900 than to the increase in the price of any of 
the articles that we have studied that are controlled by the trusts. 

Line B represents the price of wool blankets per pound ; line 
C, that of raw wool per pound; while the dotted line ~F shows 
the difference between B and C, which may roughly indicate 
the margin of cost of manufacture plus profit in the woolen 
industry, as does a similar line in the other industries previously 
studied. It was impossible for us to get trustworthy figures for 
the year 1909 for wool blankets, but there is no doubt that the 
increase in the price of wool blankets corresponds in the main to 
that of the price of raw wool. It may be noted that after 1890 
the price of wool, with minor changes, decreased from 61 cents 
in 1890 to 31.8 cents in 1896. From that time on, with only a 
minor setback in 1901 and a slight lessening from 1905 to 1908, 
its course has been steadily upwards, until in 1910 it has 
reached a level higher than at any period since 1891, and 
higher by almost 25 cents than at the time of lowest price in 
1896. Although during the period of depression, from the latter 
part of 1893 to 1899, the margin of profit on the whole de- 
creased, from 1899 to date the margin of profit on blankets 
seems on the whole to have increased, the price of blankets 
increasing, generally speaking, rather more rapidly than that of 
the raw material of which they are composed. Here, again, as 
in other lines of industry studied, regardless of whether they 
are controlled by trusts or not, it is fair to note that both an 
increase in wages and an increase in the price of the raw mate- 
rial would justify an increase in the margin, since the increased 
cost of raw material necessitates both a larger use of circulating 
capital and also a greater cost in the wastes of manufacture. 

It would seem to appear from this diagram that the increased 
cost of living for the last few years may clearly be ascribed 
in part to increases in the prices of both cotton and woolen 
goods, as well as in the price of wheat. 



9\?<H 

1.10 



ipo 

.90 
.80 

JO 










A 
D 

\ 


,60 

50 






i J1/ 
40 


E \ 




•30 


F 






.20 






10 
























|8^o 




























































WOOL AND COTTON. 




A 


WHEAT PEH BUSHEL 




D 


Sheet 


NG PER 10 POUND 


B. 


Wool Blankets pe 


Pound. 


E. 


Cotto 


PER 5 POUNDS. 


C. 


WOOL PER POUND. 




F. 


DIFFER 


NCE BETWEEN B 



I I 
















rd 



sh 



















1910.1 HOUSE — No. 1750. 425 



7. Cattle and their Products. 

During the last year more perhaps has been said regarding 
the increased cost of living from the increased price of meat 
than about any other cause. It has not been found practicable 
to secure figures covering all of these prices over a series of 
years to date, but average wholesale prices have been taken from 
the reports of the Bureau of Labor for the period 1890-1908, 
inclusive. Line E on Diagram VIII. represents the price of 
cattle on the hoof per 100 pounds, while line D represents the 
price of fresh beef per 100 pounds. Line E represents the mar- 
gin of difference between these two. It has been popularly sup- 
posed that for a number of years the combination of packers in 
Chicago, the so-called beef trust, has controlled the price of beef, 
and it has been thought by many that this combination has 
likewise controlled the price of cattle. Under those circum- 
stances the margin between the two should have increased. It 
will be noted, however, from the diagram, that with the excep- 
tion of the year 1908, at no time were the profits so high as dur- 
ing the years 1891, 1892 and 1893. Together with an increase 
on the whole in the price of beef, although that has not been 
especially marked until within the last two or three years, with 
the exception of one year, 1902, the price of cattle on the hoof 
seems to have increased rather more and more regularly. In 
the last year, 1909, with a marked increase in the price of 
cattle, there was a still greater decline in the price of beef, so 
that the margin of profits was distinctly less than the year 
preceding. 

It was to be expected that the price of cattle would increase 
fully as rapidly as the price of beef. The combination would 
of course follow the price of its raw material, which so far as is 
known is not controlled by a trust. The price of cattle has been 
forced up by restricted grazing land, compelling the feeding of 
corn; the price of corn has likewise increased decidedly, from 
the greater demand, the higher cost of production and the lim- 
ited supply. 

Line C represents the prices of hides per hundredweight. 
This line, with its remarkable fluctuations since 189-1, on 
the whole rapidly rising until 1906, affected in part per- 



426 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

haps by special conditions, perhaps by the tariff, has not followed 
so closely the line indicating prices of either cattle or beef, nor 
have the prices of hides been followed so closely by the prices of 
leather or of shoes. Hides of course are largely imported, and 
it is not to be expected that their prices would be controlled in 
the same way and to the same extent as the prices of beef. It 
is to be noted again, however, that these remarkable fluctuations 
and this remarkable increase in price are as noteworthy as any 
fluctuations in the prices of products controlled by the trusts; 
and they are more remarkable than any of those prices since the 
establishment of the existing combinations which have declared 
the policy of attempting to steady prices. 

There may be noted in line B, representing the price of 
leather, some fluctuations that seem to correspond rather closely 
to those in the price of hides, especially in the years 1892-94, 
1895, 1896, and then in the general later upward tendency. 

Similarly, the price of shoes, as represented by line A, corre- 
sponds somewhat to the decreases and to the later increase in the 
price of leather. Inasmuch, however, as the prices of shoes are 
to a considerable extent dependent upon trademarks, they would 
not be expected to follow closely the fluctuations in the prices 
of hides and leather, although the very decided increase in the 
prices of both of these articles might be expected to be felt 
somewhat in the increased price of shoes during the last years. 
There seems to have been since 1899 a rather steady average 
increase in these prices, noted particularly during the years 
1905 and 1906. 

Conclusion. 

It is of course not just to compare the fluctuations in the 
prices of raw materials, such as wheat or cotton, with those of 
certain manufactured products, such as shoes or steel rails or 
even sugar; because, owing to the fact that they are raw mate- 
rials, for which there is an enormous but a steady and insistent 
demand, and to the further fact that the quantity of production 
is very largely dependent upon the seasons, the variations in 
supply are so large that there must be very great fluctuations 
in prices. The supply of steel or of shoes is in no such sense 
dependent upon changes of season or other fortuitous influ- 
ences. From the nature of such farm products as those named, 



PRICES OF CATTLE, 9EEF, HIDES AND S 



90 








1895 








|90O 








1905 








ms 






































^ 






B 


A 














n 














J 


'S 
















/ 


\ 






/ 


\ 




/ 


\ 




/ 


>< 


-X 




J< 


/ 








\ 







B / 






\ 


/ 




\ 


/ 


/ 


V. 




/ 


\ 






























/ 


/ 






































/ 


























' C__ 








/ 


\ 


/ 












\ 










/?■ 


f 




\ 


\ 




/ 


\ 


/ 










/ 


\ 












\ 


/ 


°/ 


-.J 


.•A 


V 


r 


\ 


























__$ 










\ 


I 














/ 


S 












^ 


■ 
























/ 


\ 












c 


■v 




































j 


-. 


F 


































^ 


< 








































v 


/ 










































1. 






















































— 1 
























1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 427 

though a trust might control prices in certain lines, say fruit, 
it would hardly hold prices down in case of a crop failure, nor 
maintain them if the crop were unprecedentedly large. 

On the whole, it may be noted from the course of prices illus- 
trated in the diagrams that the general trend of prices of most 
products since 1895 or 1896 has been strongly upward. This 
increase is doubtless primarily due to the depreciation in the 
relative value of gold, owing to its greatly increased production. 
On the other hand, the study of the course of prices of special 
articles shows that a great industrial combination, like the 
American Sugar Refining Company, or the United States Steel 
Corporation, or the Standard Oil Company, which controls a 
large percentage of the entire output, may exert a very decided 
influence upon the market, in the way of either increasing or 
lessening the prices, or of steadying them. 

The diagrams also show that in certain instances at least the 
combinations have increased these prices beyond competitive 
rates, and presumably in some cases beyond what would be con- 
sidered rates sufficient to produce a fair profit. But it shows 
equally well that in certain cases the combinations have felt it 
wise to hold prices down, and to maintain steadiness of prices 
throughout great changes of demand. Since a number of the 
great trusts were formed before the general rise in prices began, 
and since their policy of exploitation of the consumer has usually 
been greatest at the beginning, we could, indeed, not say that 
the late increase in prices is due to them, even though they have 
exerted steadily some influence toward making some prices high. 
The general conclusion must be that the late great general 
increase in prices cannot be ascribed to the trusts, especially the 
prices that mainly affect the cost of living, though they are 
probably responsible for a small part of it. The diagrams taken 
as a whole bear out this general conclusion, as well as the asser- 
tion that the trusts do influence the prices of their products some- 
what and in certain cases materially. 

By "trusts and industrial combinations" one ordinarily means 
the great corporations whose operations are national, even world- 
wide in extent ; and the statistical data given refer to them. 
The Secretary of Agriculture has lately called attention to local 
combinations of retail dealers who have possibly an even greater 



428 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

influence upon the cost of living. Although as jet there are no 
trustworthy statistics on a large scale that can enable us to prove 
such a general influence, personal observation in different locali- 
ties confirms this statement. In small towns and cities the 
butchers and grocers often have associations to promote their 
common interests, and it is known that in some instances at least 
their activity goes to the extent of influencing city councils to 
place difficulties in the way of competitors from outlying towns, 
and even to agreements upon retail prices. It is much easier 
to secure statistics on matters that affect the whole country, such 
as the wholesale prices asked by the great combinations; but 
there is good reason for believing that a careful study of retail 
prices, made in say one hundred different localities in various 
parts of the country, together with the margin of profit and cost 
of selling between wholesale and retail prices, would show an 
influence not less than that exerted by the great trusts. 

It seems probable, too, that these local combinations would 
account to some extent not merely for high prices but also for in- 
creased prices, as the growth and influence of such organizations 
seem to be, relatively speaking, recent. It is to be hoped that 
the investigations to be undertaken by commissions will not over- 
look this important factor. 

Much, too, has been said about the middlemen as a cause of 
the increased prices. Doubtless their profits add to the cost of 
living. There is, however, no reason for thinking that their 
profits are increasing. It is rather to be observed that, largely 
through the influence of the trusts, the tendency is strongly 
toward more direct contact between the manufacturer and con- 
sumer. 

The Legal Situation. 

Section 1 of chapter 454 of the Acts of 1903 is as follows: — 

Every contract, agreement, arrangement or combination in violation 
of the common law in that thereby a monopoly in the manufacture, 
production or sale in this commonwealth of any article or commodity 
in common use is or may be created, established or maintained, or in 
that thereby competition in this state in the supply or price of any 
such article or commodity is or may be restrained or prevented, or in 
that thereby, for the purpose of creating, establishing or maintaining 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 429 

a monopoly within this state of the manufacture, production or sale 
of any such article or commodity, the free pursuit in this state of any 
lawful business, trade or occupation is or may be restrained or pre- 
vented, is hereby declared to be against public policy, illegal and void. 

Section 2 provides that the Attorney-General, or, by his direc- 
tion, a district attorney, may proceed in the name of the Com- 
monwealth against any person, trustee, director, officer or agent 
of a corporation, or against a corporation itself, to restrain the 
doing in this Commonwealth of any act herein forbidden or 
declared to be illegal, " or any act in, toward or for the making 
or consummation of any contract, agreement, arrangement or 
combination herein prohibited, wherever the same may have been 
made; " and the Superior Court is given jurisdiction to restrain 
and enjoin any such act. 

It is to be observed that this statute declares no new public 
policy and creates no new offence against public policy as it now 
exists. It in terms relates to contracts, agreements, arrange- 
ments or combinations in violation of the common law, and the 
definitive language employed in section 1 probably cannot be 
construed in any way to enlarge the meaning of the words " in 
violation of the common law " which precede it. 

In section 2 the statute defines a remedy which, as applied to 
some classes of contracts or agreements which have been held to 
be restraints of trade, is certainly of novel impression. Most of 
the cases dealing with contracts in restraint of trade have arisen 
between private individuals who were seeking to establish and 
enforce private rights; and the court has not been concerned 
with the interest of the public, except so far as public policy 
might require the several contracts under consideration to be 
held void and of no effect by reason of their provisions. 

The principles applicable to restraints of trade at common 
law are well discussed in the case of Alger v. Thacher, in 19 
Pick. 51. After referring to the leading case upon the subject, 
the court continues : — 

Ever since that decision, contracts in restraint of trade generally 
have been held to be void, while those limited as to time or place or 
persons have been regarded as valid and duly enforced. Whether these 



430 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

exceptions to the general rule were wise and have really improved it, 
some may doubt ; but it has been too long settled to be called in question 
by a lawyer. 

This doctrine extends to all branches of trade and all kinds of 
business. 

The court, through Morton, J., further said : — 

The unreasonableness of contracts in restraint of trade and business 
is very apparent from several obvious considerations : — 

1. Such contracts injure the parties making them, because they dimin- 
ish their means of procuring livelihoods and a competency for their 
families. They tempt improvident persons, for the sake of present 
gain, to deprive themselves of the power to make future acquisitions, 
and they exjDOse such persons to imposition and oppression. 

2. They tend to deprive the public of the services of men in the 
employments and capacities in which they may be most useful to the 
community as well as themselves. 

3. They discourage industry and enterprise, and diminish the prod- 
ucts of ingenuity and skill. 

4. They expose the public to all the evils of monopoly. And this 
especially is applicable to wealthy companies and large corporations, 
who have the means, unless restrained by law, to exclude rivalry, monop- 
olize business and engross the market. Against evils like these, wise 
laws protect individuals and the public, by declaring all such contracts 
void. 

Most of the cases cited deal with contracts or agreements 
between individuals, and are intended to protect and preserve 
the good will of a business which had been sold, the use or the 
manufacture of a patented article, the enjoyment of a secret 
process of manufacture or the practice of a profession. The rule 
applicable to such agreements is stated in Oregon Steam Naviga- 
tion Company v. Winsor, 20 Wall. 64, 66, where Mr. Justice 
Bradley, speaking for the court, says : — 

It is a well-settled rule of law that an agreement in general re- 
straint of trade is illegal and void; but an agreement which operates 
merely in partial restraining of trade is good, provided it be not un- 
reasonable, and there be a consideration to support it. In order that 
it may not be unreasonable, the restraint imposed must not be larger 
than is required for the necessary protection of the party with whom 
the contract is made. A contract, even on good consideration, not to 
use a trade anywhere in England, is held void in that country, as being 
too general. A restraint of trade at a particular place, if it be founded 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 431 

on a good consideration, and be made for a proper and useful pur- 
pose, is valid. Of course a contract not to exercise a trade generally 
would be obnoxious to the rule, and would be void. 

The earliest Massachusetts case, which we have been able 
to find, that deals directly with a combination made for the 
purpose of controlling the output of a manufactured article and 
regulating the price is Central Shade Roller Company v. Cush- 
man, 143 Mass. 353. In that case three individuals who were 
the manufacturers of a certain kind of curtain fixture under 
different letters patent owned by them severally, formed a cor- 
poration in which they were the only stockholders, and an 
agreement was made between the corporation so formed and 
the manufacturers, under the terms of which the corporation 
received the sole right to sell the curtain fixture for three years, 
and agreed in return to buy, at a fixed price, all that the 
several manufacturers might produce ; the contract being set 
out at length at page 354. The court said : — 

The contract does not restrict the sale of the commodity. ... In 
effect, it is an agreement between three makers of a commodity, that, 
for three years, they will sell it at a uniform price fixed at the outset, 
and to be changed only by consent of a majority of them. The agree- 
ment does not refer to an article of prime necessity, nor to a staple 
of commerce, nor to merchandise to be bought and sold in the market, 
but to a particular curtain fixture of the parties' own manufacture. 
It does not look to affecting competition from outside, — the parties 
have a monopoly by their patents, — but only to restrict competition 
in price between themselves. Even if such an agreement tends to raise 
the price of the commodity, it is one which the parties have a right 
to make. To hold otherwise would be to impair the right of persons 
to make contracts, and to put a price on the products of their own 
industry. 

The next case of this character was Gloucester Etc. Co. v. 
Russia Cement Co., 154 Mass. 92. This was an agreement 
between two corporations, which were engaged in litigation 
with each other as to an alleged infringement of a patent owned 
by the plaintiff, made for the purpose of controlling the profit- 
able manufacture of fish glue, and was sustained uuder authority 
of Central Shade Roller Co. v. Cushman, supra. The court 
said: — 



432 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Even if they hoped for gain by their joint exertions, or by the pos- 
session of a patent as to the value of which they were subsequently 
disappointed, their contract had no relation to an article of prime 
necessity or to staple commodities ordinarily bought and sold in the 
market, but to a particular article, of which both were manufacturers 
under the same process, and to an article used in the manufacture 
which was of little value for any other use. 

In Gamewell Fire Alarm Tel. Co. v. Crane, 160 Mass. 50, 
which was a bill in equity to enjoin the violation of a contract 
between the plaintiff and defendant, who had been a manufac- 
turer of fire-alarm and police-telegraph apparatus, the plaintiff 
was to have the use of patents belonging to Crane for the term 
of ten years, and to give all its manufacturing to firms in which 
Crane was interested, upon the condition that he should agree 
" not to engage in the business of manufacturing or selling fire- 
alarm or police-telegraph machines and apparatus, and not to 
enter into competition with said Gamewell Company, either 
directly or indirectly, for the period of ten years next ensuing 
after the date of this agreement." The court held that the 
stipulation was something more than was " reasonably neces- 
sary to protect the plaintiff in the enjoyment of the property it 
bought, even if that should be adopted as the test, " upon which 
no opinion was expressed, and the court continued: — 

The principal object of the stipulation was, we think, to prevent the 
manufacture or sale by the defendant of any instruments which would 
serve the same purpose as those made and sold by the plaintiff, and 
thus to enable the plaintiff more completely to control the market. 
Large cities and towns cannot well do without some kind of fire-alarm 
and police-telegraph apparatus, and it is an article of necessity for 
such municipalities. We are of opinion that under our decisions the 
stipulation must be pronounced void, as against public policy. If 
there is to be a change in the law, as heretofore many times declared 
by this court, we think it is for the Legislature to make it. 

In Anchor Electric Co. v. Hawkes, 171 Mass. 101, the court 
held that the agreement there discussed, which included the 
transfer of the business of certain corporations to a new cor- 
poration, the vendors stipulating that they would not at any time, 
directly or indirectly, enter into or conduct or assist in conduct- 
ing any business that should in any way interfere with or com- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 433 

pete with the business of the new corporation for a period of five 
years, went no further than was reasonably necessary to protect 
the good will of the business sold by the defendant. 

In Gibbs v. Smith, 115 Mass. 592, an agreement not to bid 
or to influence any one else to bid for the service or labor of 
the inmates of a house of correction, was held to be against 
public policy and void; the court saying, through Mr. Justice 
Devens : — 

An agreement between two or more persons that one shall bid for 
the benefit of all upon property about to be sold at public auction, 
which they desire to purchase together, either because they propose 
to hold it together, or afterwards to divide it into such parts as they 
wish individually to hold, neither desiring the whole, or for any similar 
honest or reasonable purpose, is legal in its character, and will be 
enforced; but such agreement, if made for the purpose of preventing 
competition and reducing the price of the property to be sold below 
its fair value, is against public policy and in fraud of the just rights 
of the party offering it, and therefore illegal. (Phippen v. Stickney, 
3 Met. 384, 387; 1 Story Eq. Jur. § 293; Story Sales, § 484.) 

In Sampson v. Shaw, 101 Mass. 145, the court considered an 
agreement to operate in the stock of a horse railway company, 
for the purpose of getting a corner, illegal and fraudulent. 

Neither of the last two cases is directly in point, but they 
tend to show that at common law the courts will hold to be 
illegal an agreement or combination among several parties to 
control either the manufacture or the price of a commodity, 
where such agreement was not designed to protect the good will 
of a business that was the subject of sale between the parties, 
or the price, as between the parties, of an article patented, or 
manufactured under patents owned, by them. If the article 
that was the subject of the agreement was a commodity of 
prime necessity, or was 'commonly bought and sold upon the 
markets and commonly used by the public, and if such agreement 
tended either to restrict the output or to enhance the price of 
such commodity, it is probable that the agreement would be 
void, as against public policy. For this proposition there is no 
direct authority in this Commonwealth, but it is to be observed 
that in both Central Shade Roller Co. v. Cushman and Glouces- 
ter Etc. Co. v. Russia Cement Co. the court distinctlv stated 



434 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

that the products which were the subject of the agreements under 
consideration were not articles of prime necessity, staples of com- 
merce, or merchandise to be bought and sold in the market. 

The following letter from the Attorney-General throws fur- 
ther light on the situation : — 

Robert Luce, Esq., Chairman of the Commission on the Cost of Living. 
Dear Sir : — I am in receipt of your communication of April 13, 
in which you say : — 

We are of the belief that the Legislature and the public will find ad- 
vantage in a statement from you, to be embodied in our report, setting 
forth the legal situation in Massachusetts in the matter of trusts and 
monopolies. We would suggest that it be made in the shape of a reply 
to the following question, which shall be construed broadly enough to cover 
the field of inquiry in question : — 

Do you lack any powers that can be given to you by legislation, neces- 
sary to cope with such evils as may arise within the Commonwealth, from 
contracts, combinations in the form of trusts or otherwise, conspiracies in 
restraint of trade, or monopolies harmful to the public interest, — and, if 
so, what are the powers lacking? 

Your question calls for an expression of opinion by me upon matters 
which, in great measure, fall within the exclusive field of legislative 
determination. Contracts, combinations or conspiracies which unrea- 
sonably restrain trade or increase prices or create monopolies are void 
at common law, and may be so declared by appropriate process in 
the courts. How far it is desirable to make illegal contracts or com- 
binations which, to some extent, tend to restrain trade but which at 
common law are not invalid therefor, as such contracts and combina- 
tions are made illegal by the so-called Sherman anti-trust act (26 U. S. 
Stat, at L. 209), is a question purely legislative, which must be dealt 
with by the Legislature, and I can therefore express no opinion upon it. 

If the provisions of the federal legislation upon the subject were 
adopted in this Commonwealth, and contracts, combinations in the 
form of trust or otherwise, conspiracies in restraint of trade or com- 
merce, or monopolies, should be declared illegal, and every person 
entering into such contracts, combinations or conspiracies should be 
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, adequate provisions for criminal 
prosecutions by the proper officers would doubtless be included in the 
law. 

With respect to civil proceedings for the purpose of restraining the 
performance of contracts or the formation or continuance of com- 
binations or conspiracies in restraint of trade which are now unlawful 
at common law or may hereafter be made unlawful by statute, I am 
of opinion that the Attorney-General, as the constitutional law officer 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 435 

of the Commonwealth, already has sufficient authority, without express 
statutory provision, to bring proceedings to secure the end desired. In 
dealing- with this subject, however, the Legislature might well deem 
it proper to enact such express provisions regarding the procedure 
to be followed in civil cases as would tend to facilitate the proof of 
necessary allegations or expedite the proceeding itself; but until such 
legislation is submitted to me, it is obviously improper for me to sug- 
gest more definitely the character of such provisions. 
Very truly yours, 

Daxa Maloxe, Attorney-General. 

Recommendation. 

Forty years ago the Commonwealth of Massachusetts set the 
example, since followed throughout the Union, of a method of 
dealing with the railroad problem that has proved efficient and 
adequate. We created a Railroad Commission that should hear 
the grievances of the people, and should take steps to secure their 
redress. Our own policy, not invariably followed in the copy- 
ing, was to give this commission only advisory powers, but they 
have been found enough for the purpose. Only once, it is said, 
has a railroad refused to follow the advice of the commission: 
then the Legislature acted so promptly that no railroad has re- 
peated this attempt. 

We have developed a policy of " regulated monopoly " for our 
quasi-public utilities. In theory it was originally based on the 
ground that we grant our public-service corporations certain 
franchises which carry with them the right of public control. 
In practice we have gone far beyond this, and now regulate these 
corporations on general grounds of public policy. 

May it not be that we have reached the point where we may 
wisely consider applying the same principle and like practice 
to the distribution of the staple articles that make up the neces- 
sities of life? The Constitution forbids us to take over their 
distribution, as the Supreme Court held in the matter of munici- 
pal coal yards. Of the wisdom of such a course there need not 
now be question. It was not such a course upon which we en- 
tered when we created our Railroad Commission. It was not 
necessary to pursue it in order to regulate our railroads. It is 
not necessary to pursue it in order to regulate the supply of our 
necessities. 



436 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

The railroad remedy was simple : first, publicity ; and second, 
the calm advice of a disinterested tribunal having the public 
confidence. 

We recommend to the Legislature the serious consideration of 
a like remedy for such evils as may arise from the control of 
the distribution of the necessities of life by trusts and monopolis- 
tic combinations. 

This remedy might be applied in precisely the same way. A 
Commission of Commerce could be created, before which any 
citizen might lay any complaint of injustice in the distribution 
of the staple articles of traffic, brought about by combination 
in restraint of trade. The great commercial and industrial 
corporations aver that they do not seek unreasonable profits, 
and that they treat all men alike. The important thing is to 
know the facts. By the usual processes of the courts the facts 
can be disclosed only after long delay and costly litigation, — a 
burden that should be imposed neither on the public nor on any 
individual. If the corporations in question are sincere, they 
have no valid ground for declining to disclose the facts. Mo- 
nopolistic in their purpose and nature, they have not the ordi- 
nary reasons that may justify the competitive corporation in 
maintaining the privilege of privacy. They have no more right 
to be immune from investigation than the insurance company 
or the bank. 

Whenever, then, a petitioner could satisfy such a tribunal 
as we suggest that monopoly exists or is threatened, it should 
have powers of investigation, coupled with powers of advice. 

There could be no hardship, no impairment of private initia- 
tive, no restraint of legitimate competition, no undue inter- 
ference with individual rights, if the powers of this commission 
were broad enough to cover such questions as those that arise 
between the producers, the distributors and the consumers of 
milk or any other of the simple necessities. At present, for 
example, the differences between the producers and the distrib- 
utors of milk endanger at intervals the supply of an article 
admitted to be necessary to the health and happiness of the 
people. Dispassionate advice from a public tribunal, made 
acquainted with the facts, would without question speedily re- 
move all danger. The coal strike produced a like emergency 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 437 

that may happen again, and at any time we may be confronted 
with similar situations in the matter of ice. 

It has of late come to be understood as never before that a 
state of mind may be of great importance to health. This is 
just as true of a community as of an individual. Great injury 
may come to the body politic, to its commerce and its industry, 
through inflamed passions, through fear or suspicion or worri- 
ment. Knowledge is the remedy. At present the public forms 
its opinions without adequate information. Upon baseless 
charges it will too often pillory without a hearing captains of 
commerce who are in reality innocent of wrongdoing, but who 
are the victims of economic forces beyond their control. Profits 
cannot compensate them for the loss of the respect and good will 
of the communities which they have in reality tried to serve. 
Sometimes they lose profits and respect together. They may be 
tempted by a sense of injustice to commit the offences of which 
they have already been found guilty at the bar of public opin- 
ion, feeling that they have nothing more to lose, and may as 
well reap the obnoxious profit, if they are to be punished in 
any event. 

Such a situation does nobody good, and everybody harm. Its 
evils are rampant. They have arrayed the whole body of con- 
sumers against those who should be their friends and fellow 
workers for the common welfare. Whether or not the men who 
to-day dominate and direct much the greater part of the indus- 
tries of this country have been guilty of wrongdoing, whether 
or not the few are oppressing the many, — robbing them, as 
the customary phrase is, — nothing is to be accomplished by 
loud speech and vain words. Something definite, direct and 
sure must be done before the community will be content. The 
community has the right to be informed. It was in recognition 
of such a right that this very commission was established. It 
is meet and proper, in our belief, that still further opportunity 
for information shall be at continuous command. 

In Canada this right has already been recognized. A bill 
that may by this time have become law was introduced by the 
Minister of Labour, Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King, with the ap- 
proval of the Ministry, and therefore the certainty of adoption, 
providing boards " for the investigation of combines, monopolies, 



438 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

trusts and mergers which may enhance prices or restrict com- 
petition to the detriment of consumers." It is purposed to use 
the power of removing a tariff or annulling a patent for punish- 
ing whoever unduly limits facilities for transporting, manu- 
facturing or supplying any article of commerce, or unduly re- 
strains or injures trade therein. Such punishments would of 
course be beyond the power of any one State of the Union. We 
are not confident, however, that they would be necessary. 
Stronger are the powers of public opinion, and wholly adequate, 
in our judgment. But public opinion should be based on. exact 
knowledge. This we urge that the Legislature shall put at the 
command of the community. 

F. TRADE UNIONS AND LABOR COSTS. 
The opinion has been advanced that the trade union is a main 
factor, if not the chief cause, in the recent advance of prices. 
E. L. Waitt, secretary of the Employers' Association of Spring- 
field, declares that, in seeking for the cause of the increased 
cost of living, inquirers have hit every nail but the right one. 
The underlying cause of the present high cost of living is " the 
coercive trade union." Similarly, John Kir by, Jr., president 
of the National Association of Manufacturers, maintains : — 

The primary cause of the constantly advancing prices of commodities 
of all kinds lies at the door of the labor trust, a cardinal principle 
of which is to raise wages and restrict production, neither of which 
can fail to diminish the purchasing power of the dollar, and when 
working together they doubly depreciate its value. 

Other observers, who take a less hostile attitude toward trade 
unionism, are nevertheless of the opinion that increase of wages, 
reduction of hours and restriction of output, through the in- 
fluence of organized labor, have played a very considerable part 
in the upward price movement of the last twelve years. It 
devolves upon any investigator into the causes of the phenome- 
non of high prices to examine this contention impartially. 

It may be pointed out, in the first place, that two factors 
are to be considered in determining the relation of wages to 
cost of production in general, namely, the money paid and the 
work done. When men talk about wages, as a rule they have 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 439 

in mind only the money paid. This is not inaccurate if it is 
understood, for instance, that, in discussing two rates of money 
paid, the work done is the same in each case; but if the work 
done differs, then both things must be taken into account in 
the comparison. 

Clearer thinking follows if instead of " wages " the term 
" labor cost " is used. 

If labor organizations have increased the cost of living, it 
must be because labor cost has been increased; and this in 
turn means that either money paid for labor has been in- 
creased, — that is to say, " wages," in the common use of that 
word, have risen, — or else the work done in return for a 
given payment has lessened; or both things have happened. 
Furthermore, when considering the money paid, the purchasing 
power of that money must be taken into account. We have 
seen that in the matter of the purchasing power of the money 
paid, commonly called " wages," there has been no general in- 
crease, unless it has come about within a very few months, since 
the last day to which the comparative tables could be brought, 
which is not probable. Such increase in money payments as 
has taken place, viewed as a whole, has not played a part in 
increasing the cost of living. 

There remains a question of much more difficulty, because 
it is incapable of statistical determination. No man can say 
with certainty whether the labor cost of production in general 
has increased or has lessened by reason of change in the amount 
of work done for the same amount of money. 

It is well known that for a century there has been in prog- 
ress a steady lessening of the average amount of labor, measured 
in daily hours. Each drop has been contested by employers, 
with positive assertions that it meant increase in labor cost. 
Yet, leaving recent changes out of account, every drop has been 
accepted, after matters have adjusted themselves, as lessening- 
labor cost rather than increasing it. The total product of the 13- 
hour day was found to be greater than that of 14 hours ; of the 
12-hour day, greater than 13; of the 11-hour day, greater than 
12. There was general though not universal acceptance of the 
belief that in 10 hours the workers as a mass accomplished more 
than in 11. Doubt was much greater when the results of the 



440 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

9-hour day were compared with those of the 10-hour day ; it is 
now widespread in comparing the product of the 8 and 9 hour 
days. 

Manifestly, in this steady lessening of the number of hours of 
daily work a point will be reached where the total product will 
fall off, — the point of " maximum efficiency." It is of the 
greatest economic importance to the community that the loca- 
tion of this point shall be determined. Yet it would be most 
unfortunate if, in trying to locate this point, sight should be 
lost of the fact that it is only one of the important considera- 
tions involved in the question of the working day. The science 
of economics cannot treat men as mere machines. It must not 
be forgotten that they have senses and minds and souls. Pro- 
duction is not the end of human existence. The maximum 
of productive efficiency is only one of the ends to be sought 
by society, and it should not be pursued too exclusively to the 
neglect of other and higher ends. 

This inquiry, however, is not to concern itself with these 
other considerations, — with the right of the masses to more 
leisure, more recreation, more enjoyment, more chance for 
mental and spiritual growth. It is our province here simply to 
determine what are the economic causes for the increase in the 
cost of living. To that end we are to view men for the moment 
simply as machines, reserving for some other opportunity the 
right to consider them in what may, after all, be far more 
important aspects, — as human beings, with bodies and minds 
and souls. 

For the scientific determination of the maximum working- 
day efficiency the material is as yet wholly inadequate. What 
there is has just been collated in a valuable report by a Nova 
Scotia Commission on the Hours of Labor. The result shows 
that facts are scarce and opinions plentiful, with wide diver- 
gence. Almost the only actual analysis of the effects of change 
is that made in the case of the Salford Iron Works, Manches- 
ter, Eng., employing about 1,200 men, which in 1893 reduced 
its weekly hours of labor from 53 to 48, in order to test by 
direct experiment the results of an 8-hour day. This concern 
does what in England is called engineering work, running what 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 441 

here we should call a " machine shop." All its products are 
subject to the keenest competition. Two-thirds of its men are 
paid by the day. The conditions of the experiment were agreed 
upon with the officials of the trades unions of the engineering 
and machine-making trades of the United Kingdom. During 
the trial year there was no overtime whatever except for break- 
downs and repairs. The same wages were paid, the work done 
was the same in character, and there was no change in ma- 
chinery or its speed. An accountant was employed to take 
daily and weekly notes of the smallest detail of time and cost 
through all the year. As a result of the experiment, the firm 
made the 48-hour week permanent, and its head, Mr. Mathers, 
felt so assured of the advantage of a shorter day that he brought 
the matter before the War Office, the Admiralty and the Post- 
Office department, with the result that the Woolwich authori- 
ties adopted the 48-hour week. 

In Massachusetts as yet the matter is almost wholly one of 
opinion. We shall present here the views of those who have 
studied it from all sides. 

1. The Employers'' Side. ' 

In order to ascertain the opinion of employers on the ques- 
tion of whether the increased cost of living is in any degree due 
to labor unions or labor laws, we sent the following blank form 
to employers in various lines of manufacture, taken at ran- 
dom: — 

I have had opportunity to observe the effect of labor laws and labor 
unions for years in the industry. 

In my judgment, the average adult male wage earner in this in- 
dustry, working under normal conditions, can be employed 
hours a week to produce the maximum efficiency, with the minimum of 
sickness, and with the greatest likelihood of reaching old age without 
then or earlier becoming a public charge for physical reasons. 

In my judgment, the average adult female wage earner in this in- 
dustry can be employed hours a week to produce like results. 

In my judgment, the average boy or girl can begin work in this 
industry at years of age without danger of stunting physical 

development or impairing his or her efficiency as a producer during 
adult life. 



442 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May. 



In my judgment, labor unions or labor laws, whether relating to 
hours, sanitary regulations or other matters, have increased net costs 
of production as follows : — 

In my belief, there might well be additional legislation along the 
following lines, to increase the productivity of this industry : — 

Views of Textile Manufacturers. 

Replies were received from 66 manufacturers of textiles, 
two-thirds of whom reported more than twenty years of oppor- 
tunity for observation, 19 of them more than thirty years. 
Their judgments of the weekly working hours of maximum 
efficiency for men and women are summarized as follows : — 



Horns. 


For 

Men. 


For 
Women. 


Hours. 


For 

Men. 


For 
Women. 


60 

58 

56 


39 

22 

3 


21 
32 

8 


54, 

58-60 


1 
1 


3 
2 



In the matter of the age limit for minors, 1 named eighteen 
years; 23, sixteen years; 6, fifteen years; 35, fourteen years; 
and* 1, fourteen to fifteen years. 

Among the comments relating to the effects of labor laws and 
labor unions were the following : — 

The product has been decreased by a per cent, equal to the lessened 
time machinery runs. Given a plant of a certain equipment and effi- 
ciency, and reduce the hours of labor, and your product diminishes 
in the proportion that reduced time bears to whole time machinery is 
run. We have proved that to our satisfaction. 

Labor is not as efficient as formerly, as the wage earners do not 
take the interest they did in their work. They consider it is not neces- 
sary. The labor agitator leads them to think the laws and union will 
provide for them. 

I consider labor unions a great menace to this country, for I think 
that labor should be paid what it is worth; and, as one man may be 
able to produce more than another, he should be paid more, and not 
all alike, as is now the case with union wages. Labor has certainly 
increased the cost of living to an alarming extent, and with the con- 
stantly increasing demands for more wages the cost of living must 
constantly increase with shorter hours and more pay as they are con- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 443 

tinually asking for. Legislation has also increased the cost of living, 
by compelling the manufacturers to run shorter hours. 

Twenty to 25 per cent, increased cost of labor, and perhaps nearly 
same on cost of production outside of labor. 

If cost of the raw material [cotton] could be regulated, so we could 
secure it on a strictly supply-and-demand basis, do not think the labor 
unions or labor laws would seriously increase the net cost of production. 

Labor unions have a tendency to lower the average skill and ambition 
of the worker. Shorter hours with the same fixed charges of course 
increases the cost. 

Only in so far as they have decreased the hours of labor, since in 
most departments of our industry production has been correspondingly 
decreased, while weekly wages have remained the same. We pay the 
same rate for 56 hours as we did for 58 hours, and in the case of 
piece workers have increased their rate about 4 per cent. In figuring 
cost of our goods we have added 4 per cent, to the former labor cost. 
In our industry I do not think that the proportion of labor cost is 
more than 30 per cent, of the value of the product, so that an in- 
crease of 4 per cent, in wages only makes a little over 1 per cent, on 
the total product. 

Both have reduced production and so raised the per cent, of fixed 
charges, increasing net cost of production. By removing the incentive 
to effort and destroying ambition the unions have lowered the quality 
of labor, and it now costs more of the inferior labor to get the former 
product. Labor laws have driven industrious workers to other States. 

In each case where hours of labor have been reduced we have had 
to pay the same wages, so that this has shown a marked increase in 
cost of manufacture. 

By working less hours than formerly; by neglecting their work; by 
poor discipline, made possible by labor laws. Impossible to produce 
the same amount of work in 56 hours as in 60. Prices for day help 
are about the same as when they worked 60 hours. Piece workers do 
not make quite as much. Fixed charges, interest on money and taxes 
are higher, if anything. 

In my judgment, labor laws, etc., have not increased the net cost, 
of production, with the exception of the recent change of 2 hours' 
working time, and I believe a better result can be obtained on a 58- 
hour basis than when the mills were run 60 and 62 hours per week. 



444 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

In other words, beyond a certain point labor ceases to be fully pro- 
ductive. I have observed this frequently in attempting to run the 
spinning room an extra hour per day, — the eleventh hour being less 
productive than any other hour. I have not observed that sanitary 
regulations have increased the cost in any degree; on the other hand, 
I think they are none too good. 

By cutting down the hours of labor, also increasing the age limit of 
children, cost of production has been increased. I think any change 
that benefits the sanitary conditions does not in the end increase the 
cost of production. 

It is impossible for us to subdivide the increased cost of production 
among the various things that are mentioned, but certainly if the hours 
of labor are decreased, the higher our cost and the more we have got 
to get for our goods. 

Undoubtedly labor unions and laws have played a large part in the 
increase of cost. We pay 100 per cent, more for labor not so efficient 
as that we hired twenty years ago. This applies especially to weavers. 

Years ago, when the cut was made from 65 to 60 hours per week, 
we experienced no particular change in the amount of production per 
week, which seemed to show that there was a point where a man or 
woman became tired and took little interest in the work. Later came 
the 58-hour week, and three years ago we cut to 55 hours per week; 
but our production loss is at least 5 per cent., and cannot be made up, 
thus increasing cost that much. 

By the evident desire of all labor unions of any or all trades to 
shirk, or, in other words, to lay down on their work and not give their 
full productive capacity to their employers. It seems to me from 
my experience that operatives in our mills try to convey the idea to 
the public in general and to legislators that they cannot earn living 
wages; whereas, if they would be honest with their employers and do 
an honest day's work they would earn better wages. To illustrate, 
in changing from 58 to 56 hours per week, January 1, 1910, the loss 
of time was about 3.45 per cent., and yet many if not all of the mills 
in our city will tell you that the loss of production was from 7 to 
7V2 per cent. Our fixed charges or expenses are always the same, 
consequently the cost of production has been increased considerably. 
Other branches of trade, I believe, could tell you the same story, — 
an increase of cost all along the line. 

The cost has been increased in proportion to the reduced time the 
mills can be in operation. My observation shows me that operatives 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 445 

in the mill do not get off any more work per hour than they did when 
working on the 60-hour-per-week basis. There is less interest taken 
by the workman in his work than formerly. 

Labor laws, as regards hours, have increased the cost of production 
with each decrease in the number of hours our employees can work. 

Conditions named above are more than offset by improvement in ma- 
chinery and otherwise. The net cost per yard is really 1 cent less 
than it was ten years ago. 

They have all added to the cost of all commodities where labor is 
a factor, and have thereby increased the cost of living or decreased 
the purchasing power of a dollar. 

In making the hours of labor less per week, so that in spite of some 
increase of speed in machinery the mills cannot turn out so many 
pounds of goods, and cost of production is thus increased. 

Ten per cent. "We have had to put this additional cost on the cost 
of goods, because we have had to pay more or higher wages. We also 
are handicapped by working the operatives 56 hours, instead of 58 
or 60. Go back to 58 hours per week. We think it is an injustice 
to women to forbid them to work more than 56 hours. For example, 
we have made it a rule to employ only men so far as possible, and 
when females apply for work we refuse them on the grounds that 
we can only work them 56 hours; and they do not like to be refused 
work on this account, as they say they cannot help what the law says, 
and that they have to earn a living as well as men. 

Labor unions and labor laws have increased the net cost of pro- 
ducing cotton fabrics in this State to a large extent, viz., 25 per cent. 

When Massachusetts went from 63 hours running time to 60, in our 
industry we found no figurable loss of product. From 60 to 58 we 
did, but not quite in proportion. From 58 to 56 we have lost just 2 
hours' production. 

Less product on account of less hours; less product on account of 
less effort to work than formerly. A very general desire to loaf, and 
take thing's easy; and a lost ambition to see how much one can earn, 
except to force it from the manufacturer without working for it. 

By shortening hours of labor the production is decreased, but ex- 
pense of operation cannot well be cut, so we figure the net increased 
cost is 7^2 per cent. 



446 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

In restriction of apprentices. Shorter hours of labor mean higher 
cost. 

Shorter hours have increased cost of production, but would not be 
objected to if it were national instead of State legislation. No proper 
sanitary regulations are objectionable. 

Labor unions, by cutting down the working day of carpenters, 
masons, bricklayers, iron workers, etc., from 10 to 8 hours, have in- 
creased the cost of production 25 per cent, within the last fifteen years. 

By restricting output, raising wages and shortening hours, lessening 
production; difficult to state how much. 

A reduction in hours of labor, without a corresponding reduction 
in wages, with no increased efficiency, has undoubtedly increased net 
cost of production. 

The working hours having been lessened by labor laws without a 
corresponding reduction in expenses, it follows that cost of production 
has increased. Sanitary regulations up to a certain extent are a bene- 
fit, and do not appreciably increase the cost of production. 

Labor unions or labor laws have made but little difference in cost 
of production. The cutting down of working hours has made a slight 
decrease in production, hence a corresponding increase in cost, but 
I cannot give any percentage of extra cost. 

Somewhat by their demands for advanced wages, and decidedly by 
limitations of product, but the large increase in wages has been made 
possible and caused by improved machinery, modern improved methods, 
production on a great scale and skilled management, in connection with 
the great prosperity caused by the wonderful natural resources of 
this country and the consequent great demands for labor; and labor 
laws, by various restrictions, some reasonable, some not, have con- 
siderably increased cost. 

I have seen our working hours reduced from 60 per week to 55, 
which we are running at present. My best belief is that the efficiency 
of the workers is better at 55 hours per week than at 60. I think that 
any normal man, woman or child, over fourteen years of age, working 
under proper sanitary conditions in a well lighted, ventilated and 
heated flax mill can work 10 hours per day five days in the week and 
5 hours on Saturday without any physical harm resulting from such 
employment. Wages have increased considerably in the last nineteen 
years, but I do not believe that there has been much increase in the 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 447 

cost of production due to the shortening of the hours of labor. It 
does not seem to me, however, that in work where machinery is to be 
tended there can be much further reduction in the hours of labor with- 
out a proportional increase in the labor cost. In regard to child labor, 
I believe that the laws raising the age of employment have directly 
increased the labor cost in this industry. I am sure that child labor 
is a decided advantage to this and similar industries, and any legis- 
lation which would increase the age of employment would directly 
increase the cost of production. 

The labor unions are largely responsible for the cause of forcing- 
higher wages. Reduction of hours is another cause, as it increases the 
wages of the man in proportion to the lesser hours worked. It stands 
to reason that a man cannot do as much work in 8 hours as he could 
in 10 hours, and therefore the production must cost more in pro- 
portion. 

The great danger to our young to-day is too much idleness, rather 
than too much work. 

The sanitary conditions in most mills are vastly better than they are 
in most of the employees' homes, and we have never been able to trace 
a sickness or injury to the health of any of our employees from any 
work or conditions in our mills. 

The legislation that would prevent a young man from sixteen years 
old up coming into a mill to work from 6 to 9 o'clock is an absurdity, 
and in my judgment is distinctly in favor of demoralization of a young- 
man, instead of a benefit to him. I am, and always have been, em- 
phatically opposed to child labor, where the child was too young or 
where such labor prevented the ordinary schooling; but to prevent 
healthy boys and girls, from sixteen up, from working to help them- 
selves and their parents along is the height of folly, and its influence, 
in my judgment, wholly bad. I speak from the point of view not 
only of manager but of laborer, as I went to work in the mill when 
I was fifteen, and I worked 72 hours a week after I was sixteen, and 
I have been at work for forty years in positions all the way from com- 
mon hand to general manager, and I now weigh 215 pounds. The 
work didn't stunt me. 

While there has been an increase of about 20 per cent, in the cost 
of labor, due largely to labor laws, during the past ten years, there 
has been a much greater increase in the cost of materials, so that the 
consumer, who is the laborer, needs all of the 20 per cent, increase 
he has received in order to buy the product on to-day's basis of cost. 



448 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

In my judgment, much needed income is lost to many families by 
idleness of minors over fourteen years old. In my judgment, the idle- 
ness of minors over fourteen years old will result in crime and vice. 

Writer began work when a small boy, and often worked 12 hours 
per day without feeling any ill effects. Writer, at the age of sixty- 
three, can be found at office an average of 9 hours each day for six 
days per week. 

The productivity of this industry, as of all textile industries, can 
be much increased by allowing minors to go to work at the age of 
thirteen or fourteen years, as they then acquire a dexterity and pro- 
ficiency in the use of their fingers and hands which they seldom can 
gain later in life; and as they are required to work, for the first year 
or two, only for fifteen to twenty minutes at a time, with intervals of 
half an hour or so between, during which time they are allowed to 
play out of doors, we do not consider the work injurious to their 
health. 

In assuming that 54 hours a week can be worked to produce the 
maximum efficiency with the minimum of sickness and best physical 
results, I wish it understood that I consider it detrimental to the cotton 
industry to further reduce the hours of labor without competing States 
being placed on the same basis. 

To reduce the work day further, say to 54 or 48 hours, as the labor 
unions and politicians are working for, would be a positive injury to 
any working man, not only in the loss of wages or by forcing up the 
cost of everything manufactured, thereby making the laborer, as well 
as everybody else, pay more for what he has to buy, but it makes 
a man lazy and he thereby loses his ambition; and in the end it would 
encourage him to see how he could get along without work at all, and 
in case after case a man would lose his self-respect and take to drink 
and neglect of family, and try to see if he could not get, from the 
many charities now being established, a living without work. This 
lessening of the hours of labor positively injures the man in the long 
run. In my opinion, all able-bodied men ought to work at something 
every day, and a full day at that, to maintain health and good physical 
condition. I mean this for the rich and poor alike, as you can see from 
time to time how it has worked for the rich man, with nothing to do 
but spend money and live an idle life. I have no sympathy with 
lessening the hours of labor further for able-bodied men and women 
in any walk of life. 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



449 



Views of Boot and Shoe Manufacturers. 
Replies were received from 43 boot and shoe manufacturers, 
two-thirds of them reporting more than twenty years of oppor- 
tunity for observation, 10 with more than thirty. Their judg- 
ments of the weekly working hours of maximum efficiency for 
men and women are summarized as follows : — 



Hours. 


For 
Men. 


For 
Women. 


Hours. 


For 
Men. 


For 

Women. 


60 


11 


5 


54, 


8 


10 


59, 


6 


2 


50 


1 


2 


58 


4 


6 


48, 


1 


2 


56 


- 


4 


55-60 


1 


- 


55 


11 


11 


50-55, .... 


- 


1 



In the matter of the age limit for minors, 1 named twenty 
years; 6, eighteen; 2, seventeen; 27, sixteen; 2, fifteen; 3, four- 
teen ; 1, fifteen to sixteen. 

Among the comments made were the following : — 

In our business we have changed from 59 to 55 hour weekly basis, 
and we feel that the cost of production has been increased by not more 
than 2 or 3 per cent. We have made increases in piece-work prices 
in the past two years which would amount to 5 or 6 per cent. ; and, 
on the other hand, we have had the advantage of new inventions in 
machinery, which would very nearly overcome the increases, so that 
the net result would be to leave us about in same position regarding 
labor cost. 

They have certainly increased the cost of production to some extent, 
but it would be difficult to say just how much. 

In the lessening of output, in the establishing of a uniform rate for 
all mechanics, thereby discouraging aggressive personal effort and a 
consequent hope of reward. 



By unreasonable demands, and not being willing to do an honest 
day's work when his demands have been granted. In my honest opin- 
ion, nine-tenths of the increased cost of living can be traced to labor 
leaders and their unions. 



450 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Fifteen per cent, by not allowing wage earners to give the producers 
the ability possessed to produce. Ten per cent, increase the past two 
years in wages, without as much production as previous to that time. 

Labor unions as conducted in this city [Brockton] have increased 
cost of production, and are a serious hindrance to business progress. 

Labor unions increase cost of production to the detriment of article 
produced and to the detriment of interest of the better artisan. 

By reduction of hours of labor; by limiting output of workmen; 
by lack of apprentice system; by closed-shops policy. 

By shortening hours of labor, as well as by increased disregard for 
interests of the employer, fostered to some extent by a sense of power 
on account of union. 

They have increased the net cost by restricting amount of work that 
an operator is allowed to do. 

By shortening the hours of labor to 50 hours per week. This re- 
striction is enforced by the majority of labor unions, and is very 
detrimental to the manufacturing interests, because it curtails the out- 
put of the factory. Shoe workers as a rule expect to earn more money 
in 50 hours now than they formerly did in 59 hours. 

By not allowing machines to be operated to full capacity by putting 
a stated amount as a day's work, and operator leaving plant early and 
not working over 7 hours a day. This also increases cost of production 
by employer not being able to operate plant to full capacity, rent of 
floor space and set manufacturing expenses being established by ca- 
pacity. As example: we had a welter working in our employ who 
would welt 40 or more dozens a day. The union notified him not to 
do but 24 dozen, and threatened him, but he paid no attention to them. 
They notified us several times, and threatened us. Finally, they threat- 
ened a suit if we did not let him go. We had to do it. 

In my judgment, labor unions or labor laws have but little to do 
with the increased cost of living. 

Labor unions have kept prices up, and they are increasing cost of 
shoemaking continually by methods of strikes, and forcing men to 
become members of the union, often against their will. 

The labor cost of our shoes has increased 3 cents a pair over the 
amount paid six years ago. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 451 

In my opinion, the high cost of living is due to labor organizations. 
The manufacturing cities are overcrowded with help, and to make the 
jobs reach as many as possible the hours of labor have been shortened, 
and the stipulated amount of work performed by labor union members 
is very small, as the standard is fixed for the slowest workman. In 
a great many factories there exists an agreement between workmen 
that they will only earn a stipulated amount, thus restricting produc- 
tion. It requires more floor space for manufacturing shoes than it 
did formerly, on account of short hours of labor and the small amount 
of work performed by individuals. Carpenters and all departments 
of the building trade are working very short hours at high rates of 
wages, which has increased the cost of fitting factories and maintaining 
repairs. Also, buildings cost more to build, consequently manufacturers 
have to pay one-third more for rent. 

Shortening of hours, 10 per cent. ; increase in earnings, 10 per cent. ; 
total, 20 per cent. The cost of labor in Massachusetts is fully 15 per 
cent, more than in Ohio and Missouri, which States are our closest 
competitors, largely caused by union restriction of production. 

Twelve and one-half to 15 cents per pair, making no allowance for 
improved method and machinery. If this were considered, believe it 
would be 25 cents or more. 

Shortened hours, raised prices, stopped apprentices, and on many 
kinds of work obstructed full development of output of machines, and 
clung to old methods or raised price in new, so it was useless. 

By arbitrarily raising prices on labor that were originally fair, the 
unions have increased the cost of producing our shoes at least 10 per 
cent, since January, 1908. 

Shorter hours of labor and increased earnings for the same operation. 
An increase in the hours of labor decreases productive costs, as the 
charges for salaries and rents remain the same. 

One peculiar thing which was brought to our attention is, that when 
we make advance in prices, take for instance 20 per cent., the work- 
man does not get the benefit of this, as it is the tendency and seems to 
be the policy of the organization to hold back the workmen as much 
as possible, and consequently with the above advance the workman 
does not receive any more wages. For instance, instead of being at 
the bench at 7 o'clock in the morning, he will arrive at 7.30 and will 
not work with the energy that he formerly used to; at the same time 
we are the loser by same, and they do not gain materially; but they 
do gain their demands, which seems to be their intention. . . . Another 



452 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

point which we would like to bring to your attention is that when 
signing price lists during the last two or three years it is invariably 
stipulated in the phrases of the agreement that the workman shall 
cease work at 12 o'clock Saturday noon. This, you can see, would 
make considerable difference when you take the number of men which 
are employed for instance in the city of Lynn alone; another thing 
is, that during the morning of Saturday the workmen make it a point 
to do as little work as possible, and our production for Saturday's 
work averages less than one-third of a day. During all this last con- 
troversy which has been going on regarding high increased cost of 
living, this point has never been brought to our attention, and we 
think it should be brought with considerable force. During the summer 
months it would be all right to close our factory Saturday afternoon, 
but not during our busy season, when we are striving to manufacture 
all the goods we possibly can. 

The wages of operatives have been materially increased in conse- 
quence of the activity of labor organizations. The cost of production 
has also been increased by the influence of unions, in limiting the 
amount of work an operative shall do. Many classes of shoe opera- 
tives, especially those handling machines, could easily do in 8 hours 
much more work than they now accomplish. The reason for this 
condition may possibly be found in the fact that in past years, as im- 
proved machinery has been introduced, and the operator enabled in 
consequence to turn off more work, the price per piece was usually 
reduced by the manufacturer, so that the earnings of the operative 
were only slightly increased by the use of the new machine, and the 
manufacturer obtained the greater part of the saving resulting from 
the change. The fear that by doing a larger number of pairs per day 
their earnings would be so increased that the manufacturer would be 
prompted, and perhaps justified, in reducing the price, was probably 
the basis of this action, and the natural laziness of the man supple- 
ments it very effectively. Labor laws or sanitary regulations have not, 
we believe, increased net costs of production in the shoe business. You 
will notice that our answers in relation to the hours of labor indicate 
48 per week as the proper amount. Our operatives now work 9 hours 
per day, and are by no means injuring themselves by this amount of 
work. Our idea is, however, that 8 hours work for all laboring people 
would be an ideal condition. If, however, such restrictions were in 
force in Massachusetts, and other parts of the country continued to 
work longer hours, the industries in this State would suffer severely. 
Any such movement as this should be national in its scope. 

The short hours and high prices paid in manufacturing centers, espe- 
cially like Lynn, attract the farm help from the country; consequently 
farm help has gone up double, and this is the cause of the high price 
of food. 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



453 



Views of Various Manufacturers. 
Replies were received from 30 manufacturers in a variety of 
other industries, whose judgments of the weekly working hours of 
maximum efficiency for men and women are summarized as fol- 
lows : — 



Hours. ** 


For 
Women. 


Hours. 


For For 
Men. Women. 


72 

60 

59, 

58 

56 

55, 


1 

13 
3 

6 

1 
1 


6 

4 
6 
2 


54 

48 

44 

58-72, .... 

54-58 

58-60 


3 

1 
1 


4 
1 
1 

1 



In the matter of the age limit for minors, 1 named twenty 
years; 4, eighteen; 15, sixteen; 2, five; 6, fourteen; 1, twelve; 
1, fifteen to sixteen. 

Among the comments made were the following : — 

Paper. 
Labor unions have improved conditions and increased efficiency. 

Have no data to arrive at percentages, but do not find labor as 
interested or efficient as formerly, and it surely is receiving higher 
rates, which must increase costs in many lines. Hours and sanitary 
regulations do add something to cost, but have compensating features. 

Shorter hours have tended to increase cost of production. Do not 
think sanitary regulations have been detrimental. 



Clothing and Hosiery. 
Unions are all right in their way, but when they say one man is 
worth as much as another, then they are wrong. There ought to be 
a graded system. 

Hair Ornaments. 
Some labor law T s have increased net cost of production, and the in- 
dustry in Massachusetts is put to a slight disadvantage; but at the same 
time we are heartily in favor of these laws, as they tend to the general 
good. 



454 COST OF LIVING. [May, 



Ladies' Straw and Felt Hats. 

Ten per cent. In our business, manufacturing ladies' and misses 
straw and felt hats, there is only about four months of the year when 
female help have a chance to work full time; and if allowed to work 
60 hours they would earn more money and we should get better returns 
on the cost of plant and machinery, which would have a tendency to 
lessen the cost of product. 

Candy. 

Decrease of hours has increased cost of production. Increased wages 
caused by labor unions. Labor laws for shorter hours have reduced 
earning capacity, consequently there is less money to spend. With 
less production, advance in prices is a natural consequence. 

Cutlery. 
By shortening the hours and demanding higher wages, the cost of 
everything into which labor enters has been increased. 

My experience is that making the workman competitive induces am- 
bition, making him a more valuable employee. 

Tools. 
I cannot but feel that the increase in the cost of living is caused 
somewhat by shorter hours of labor and the increased price for this 
labor, and I believe all these things come back on the laboring man, 
and he is the man who has to settle. 

Building. 

I am familiar with the building trades, since we have built a great 
many houses during the past fifteen years, and we figure that the cost 
of the houses built from the same identical plans and of the same 
materials, in fact, duplicates so far as we know, is to-day from 40 to 
50 per cent, more than before 1900. 

We figure in rough terms that the material in houses such as we 
build costs us from 60 to 70 per cent, of the total cost of the house, 
and the labor from 30 to 40 per cent. While the whole cost of the 
house is increased between 40 and 50 per cent., the element of labor has 
increased not only in its proportion, but has increased in addition an- 
other 50 per cent., becoming a considerably larger percentage of the 
total cost than it was formerly. 

I believe that in the building trades, basing my statement on pro- 
duction units, labor has increased during the past ten or fifteen years 
from 75 to 100 per cent.; that is to say, that it costs us nearly twice 
as much for the labor in a house to-day as it cost before 1900. 

Without getting definite costs from our books, it is my belief further 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 455 

that the general price of metallic materials which we use is to-day not 
materially more than it was in 1900 or the years immediately pre- 
ceding it. My personal experience does not extend beyond our own 
business and the cost of building. 

My general statement as to the increased cost of production, due 
to the interference of the trades unions, is based on my knowledge of 
the fact that those of our friends in the same line of industry who 
have become what we know as union shops cannot produce work for 
labor cost within 20 to 25 per cent, of our costs, and yet our indi- 
vidual workmen earn fully as much as, and I think more than, theirs. 
This is due to the one primary fact, that the union discourages in every 
way the highest production of the individual. 

Machinery. 
Within a few years we have reduced the hours of labor from 58 
to 54 hours per week. This has had the effect of limiting the amount 
of piece work a man will allow himself to do. Consequently: (1) the 
fixed charges in manufacturing machinery per unit of production are 
at least 10 per cent, greater than formerly; (2) the cost of the goods 
made is more (say 7 per cent.), the same price being paid for 54 hours 
labor that was previously paid for 58 hours; (3) limiting the amount 
of piece work tends to increase the cost of the goods probably 10 per 
cent. 

Labor unions and labor laws, as affecting hours of employees, have 
undoubtedly increased the net cost of production. The power of labor 
unions, through strikes, to regulate hours and wages, is a stumbling- 
block to the reduction of these costs. 

Lumber and Box. 
Very little in this industry. 

Labor unions or labor laws add to cost of all manufactured articles 
by curtailing the capacity of the plant, either by reducing its capacity 
10 per cent, or requiring a plant 10 per cent, larger. On the whole, 
they have increased cost of production in our business nearly 15 per 
cent. 

Leather. 

I do not feel that either labor unions or labor laws have directly 
increased the cost of production in this industry, but do believe that 
indirectly labor agitation in allied trades has had such an effect. 

Basket. 
There are no labor unions in this industry; only unskilled workmen 
are employed. Labor laws as above cited have increased the cost cer- 
tainly 10 per cent., and possibly more. 



456 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Summary of Views of Manufacturers. 

The following table summarizes the results of the inquiry as 
to the views of manufacturers concerning the weekly working 
hours of maximum efficiency for men and women in manufac- 
turing industries : — 



Hours. 


For 

Men. 


For 
Women. 


Hours. 


For 
Men. 


For 

Women. 


72, . . . . . 


1 


- 


48, 


1 


3 


60, 










63 


32 


44, . 








- 


1 


59, 










9 


2 


58-72, 








1 


- 


58, 










32 


42 


58-60, 








1 


3 


56, 










4 


18 


55-60, 








1 


- 


55, 










12 


13 


54-58, 








1 


- 


54, 










12 


17 


50-55, 








- 


1 


50, 










1 


2 









In the matter of the age limit for minors, 2 named twenty 
years; 11, eighteen; 2, seventeen; 65, sixteen; 10 fifteen; 44, 
fourteen ; 1, twelve ; 2, fifteen to sixteen ; 1, fourteen to fifteen. 

The alleged increase of the cost of production through trade 
unions and labor laws was variously estimated at 5 to 30 per 
cent. 

Sundry Recommendations. 

Give women equal right with men to make contracts. Repeal all labor 
laws except those relating to the health and safety of the operative. 
No harm will result from this, if competent inspectors are given au- 
thority to make frequent examinations and remove those unfit for the 
work. 

In answering your last inquiry, I do so in the broad sense of national 
legislation, believing that no State can enact laws within its borders 
that will work for the general good unless other States can follow 
along the same lines. I believe there should be uniform labor laws 
throughout the country; that the hours of labor would make no ma- 
terial difference to the individual manufacturer, provided they were 
the same in all States. 



Women would be helped physically by a day or two off per month 
more than bv reduced hours. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 457 

By adjusting the immigration laws, so as to allow of the introducing 
of trained English help. By so doing, both the productivity and qual- 
ity of work would be considerably increased. 

A half-time law, allowing minors to work part of their time and 
go to school during school sessions. 

By returning to 60 hours per week for both male and female adults, 
and by putting a stop to the manufacturing and sale of intoxicating 
liquors, which is doing more to undermine the health and decrease the 
efficiency of the employed as a class than any other cause. 

Establishment of technical schools; prevention of strikes and lock- 
outs by some such provision as the Canadian labor disputes act. 

A State prohibitory liquor law; better Sunday laws, so that people 
can rest; more careful supervision of mechanics. 

Trade schools. 

First, laws that compel all labor organizations to be incorporated, 
and with financial strength enough to be good for a contract; second, 
laws that shut out the possibility of strikes or lockouts, and careful 
arbitration; third, laws that compel labor organizations to omit con- 
tract clauses that shut out apprentices in producing. 

If a law could be passed compelling labor unions to present their 
price list to run for a term of twelve months, with a clause to read that 
any new work or other issue aside from said price list be referred 
to either a local or the State Board of Arbitration, a law on this line 
would be a guarantee to the manufacturer against trouble for that 
period, and the employees would thereby have steady work. 

Laws similar to Canadian laws governing strikes will help both sides. 

Compulsory arbitration before State or national board, without 
strike or lockout pending, their report. 

Legislation not needed. A more reasonable and friendly spirit and 
greater intelligence on the part of labor leaders are most essential to 
improved conditions. Legislation preventing unwise strikes and lock- 
outs, like the Canadian law, would be useful and would prevent some 
of the ill-will which strikes always occasion. 

By adoption of the Canadian law regulating strikes and lockouts. 



458 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Make it an unlawful act for labor, either in organization or in shop 
crews, to have or to promote an agreement between themselves to de- 
crease or restrict production. Make it an unlawful act for a labor 
union to punish by fine or otherwise a workman for performing more 
work than is stipulated by the union for him to do. Make it an un- 
lawful act for a labor union to ask or insist upon an employer dis- 
charging an employee because he does not belong to a union. 

Prevent strikes and lockouts and compel arbitration. 

Holding company bonds and stocks should not be allowed to draw 
dividends from companies that have a producing power when they 
are simply water and produce nothing. 

Restraint in the matter of sympathetic strikes. Trust legislation 
should be made applicable to labor union combinations, the greatest 
of all the (so-called) trusts, and as much in restraint of trade as the 
most arbitrary of them. 

First, to pass laws to do away with strikes; second, to have a com- 
mission that will have full power to call the employer and employee 
together, hear their case, and then decide what is fair and compel 
them to abide by their findings. 

Cannot suggest any legislation except perhaps an adjustment of 
affairs whereby arbitration might be made compulsory, when there 
were any disputes relating to compensation for labor services. 

Forced arbitration; workmen to work and not strike until differ- 
ences are settled. It will save trouble, lives, and bad feeling between 
employer and employed. 

First and foremost, the regulation of the power of unions to strike 
without proper arbitration; second, a system of arbitration similar 
to the Canadian form. 

Make strikes, lockouts and boycotts illegal, as this all falls heavy on 
the third and innocent parties. 

Further Statements of Employers. 

Statements bearing on the question of labor cost have been 
made either at our hearings or by mail as follows : — 
Gagnier & Angers, Springfield : — 

Mr. La Francis made the astounding statement that the labor on an 
ordinary house that fifteen years ago cost $700 to $900 now costs $400 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 459 

to $700, and that carpenters now do as much in S hours as in 10 hours 
fifteen years ago. As a matter of fact, the labor for carpentry which 
fifteen years ago cost any given sum will now cost nearly double what 
it did fifteen years ago, or, to be exact, at least 60 per cent. more. 
As to the statement that a carpenter, or any other workman, for that 
matter, will do as much work in 8 hours now as formerly in 10 hours, 
it is a very silly statement to make. I doubt very much if 8 hours 
now will produce as much work as S hours fifteen years ago. As well 
say that a man can walk as far in 8 hours as he can in 10. I have 
had in my employ continually for the last twenty years from 20 to 
75 carpenters, and have both union and nonunion, and have records 
of the cost of several hundred buildings during these twenty years, 
and can say with truth that the advance in rents has not been any- 
where near in proportion to the advance in the cost of building. The 
total cost of a dwelling house to-day is 50 per cent, more than it was 
fifteen years ago. Several items have more than doubled in price, 
and all classes of labor increased about as much as the carpenters' 
labor. 

George W. Lyman, Springfield : — 

I have looked over the cost of a number of houses I built in 1897, 
1S9S and 1899, and find that the labor cost at that time was from 
20 to 25 per cent, less than the last two years. Carpenters worked 
9 to 10 hours a day, and were paid from 22 to 30 cents per hour. 
To-day we are paying from 34 1 /2 to 41V 2 cents per hour, and foreman 
50 cents per hour. I understand Mr. La Francis's claim is that men 
do as much work in 8 hours as they did in 10 hours fifteen years ago, 
but it is not so. I should say that the labor on the average house 
to-day, say $5,000 above the land, would figure 25 per cent, and ma- 
terial 75 per cent. This is a very close estimate, as I have the cost 
of all jobs I have put up in the last twenty years, and the figures 
show the results. 

Lewis A. Crossett, shoe manufacturer : — 

I kept track of the time reduction of day labor from 10 to 9 hours, 
and I find we get exactly one-ninth less results. 

George T. Keith, shoe manufacturer : — 

There is no doubt that the average workman does not produce quite 
as much as he formerly did; that is, without any question labor is 
restricted to a certain point. I could perhaps assign several causes, 
but the average workman in my factory is supposed to do about so 
much work. I have often been told by my workmen that if they had 
the opportunity to do just what they pleased they would be glad to 
do more. 



460 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Q. What effort have the manufacturers made to re-establish, indi- 
vidually or in co-operation, the old apprentice system? A. We should 
be very glad to introduce it. 

Q. Have you made any effort to introduce it? A. Certainly we 
have. 

Q. Who opposed it? A. It was opposed by the unions. Of course 
within a year or two they have allowed us the cutters. We got to the 
point where we could not operate leather cutters, and we got to the 
point where they finally said, " We can furnish them." Of course occa- 
sionally that does arise when we are all very busy, and they will allow 
us to put on green hands or boys to learn the cutting. I think they 
will allow us one boy in ten cutters. 

Q. Do you think it is the desire of the workman to increase his 
output, in order that his earnings may be as large as possible? A. No, 
sir. 

Q. You think not? A. I say no, sir. For instance, you can go 
to my factory this afternoon at 3 o'clock, and I can show you machines 
standing idle there. The men have finished their job and gone home. 
We run until 5 o'clock, and there are times when we would be mighty 
glad to have the machines in operation, but these men have done their 
stint and got through. 

Q. And that stint is set by some one outside of the factory? A. 
Certainly; I am not shutting them off. 

William Whitman of the Arlington Mills : — 

In the formation of these labor unions there have undoubtedly been 
many errors made; in their conduct there may have been abuses; but 
those abuses, however, will be remedied in time, and I had rather 
deal with the representatives of a body than with individuals. I would 
be glad to have the labor in the mills of which I have the management 
paid as high, to say the least, as the wages paid anywhere else in 
the country under the same conditions. In olden times — I will take 
back the "olden" — in earlier times the employer had the idea that 
the employee was a servant, and that he had the right to fix the hours 
of labor, the compensation for labor, and in fact he felt that he had 
all the rights there were to it. Now, I do not believe in that. I could 
not carry on my business if I did not have the army that does the 
work co-operate with me, and I cannot get that co-operation without 
recognizing their rights. 

Views of Physicians. 
In order to get opinions from men peculiarly qualified to 
judge by reason of direct contact with the effects of present con- 
ditions, we turned to physicians in the manufacturing centers, 
— Fall River, New Bedford, Lowell, Lawrence and other like 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 461 

cities. To their replies we attach especial significance. They 
may be assumed to be men writing without that self-interest, 
whether conscious or unconscious, which to some degree actuates 
most men who have gain or loss at stake. Furthermore, they 
represent the public, which is the third party to the discussion, 
and the party whose interests are paramount in the present 
inquiry. To them we addressed this letter : — 

In view of the charge that the increased cost of living is in part 
due to the shortening of the hours of labor, it is important for us 
to get, if we can, the views of expert observers of the effect of labor 
on health, longevity and efficiency. Laying aside humane and senti- 
mental considerations, will you not tell us : — 

1. What number of hours a week, in your opinion, can the average 
adult male wage earner toil under normal conditions, with the maxi- 
mum likelihood of living to old age, with the minimum of sickness, and 
with the greatest physical and mental efficiency during the span of 
working years? 

2. What number of hours can the average female adult wage earner 
toil to produce like results? 

3. At what age can the young, male and female respectively, under- 
take physical gainful occupation during the hours customary in the 
factories of Massachusetts, without danger of stunting physical devel- 
opment or endangering health? 

Two of the replies deserve particular attention : — 

I think no expense of money or time should be spared in investi- 
gating this matter to the fullest extent possible. 

I do not believe that these questions can be at present satisfactorily 
answered. Data have not been accumulated. Answers are opinions, 
based on insufficient evidence. 

It is perfectly true that answers to such questions are to-day 
opinions, based on insufficient evidence. But action is now 
based necessarily on just such opinions, and until the Legisla- 
ture or private inquiry sees fit to secure precise data, the con- 
sensus of opinion will determine laws and customs. 

Replies that could be tabulated were received from 51 physi- 
cians, whose judgments of the weekly working hours of maxi- 
mum efficiency for men and women are to be summarized as 
follows : — 



462 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



58, 

56, 

55, 

54, 

52, 

50, 

48, 

44, 

40, 

36, 

45-75, 

58-72, 



Houes. 



For 

Men. 



10 



For 
Women. 



58-60, 
50-60, 
48-60, 
42-60, 
54-58, 
54-56, 
48-56, 
48-54, 
36-54, 
48-52, 
48-50, 
45-50, 
44-48, 
40-45, 



HOTJKS. 



For 
Men. 



For 

Women. 



As to the Work Day for Men. — Extracts from letters fol- 
low: — 



I do not believe that 12 to 15 hours of work a day or 72 to 90 hours 
a week, provided that the person follows a strictly temperate and 
regular life, will injure him, either from the mental or physical point 
of view. It is not the hard work for this period, say one-half of the 
24 hours of the day, that is detrimental to his or her general health; 
it is the way he cares for himself when he is not working. I believe 
that a man can work 10 hours a day giving more efficient service con- 
tinuously than the man who works 8 hours a day and who attempts 
to do the same amount of work. Judging from a physiological as well 
as a mechanical point of view, this is impossible. A man striving to 
do a certain amount of work, we will say 10 hours in 8 hours, is over- 
taxing his nervous energy, even though the muscular portion of his 
body could do the same. This is the point of view I fear the laboring- 
expert never takes into consideration. He believes that a man will 
work, we will say 8 hours, with all the energy he possesses, when he 
will have 16 hours left out of the 24 wherein he may recuperate; but 
it will require more time for him to recuperate, because more profound 
nervous strain is produced than in the man who has done this same 
amount of work taking 2 more hours to accomplish the same. It also 
is a self-evident fact, almost a corollary, that the man who works the 
shortest possible number of hours during the day will use more of 
his nervous energy in doing something else, so that on the following 
day he is less able to work or give his best services to his employer. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 463 

The man who goes into the factory at 7 a.m. must be up at 6 a.m., 
and his wife at 5 a.m. or before. The hour usually given at noon is 
too short a time for the worker to get from the factory to his home, 
eat and digest a proper dinner and return to the factory. The ma- 
jority live at a distance requiring a ten-minute walk in each direction. 
Cold lunches carried in lunch boxes by many workmen are not con- 
ducive to good health and strength. The employee not in the best of 
health is more liable to injury, especially where there is much ma- 
chinery. 

Depends upon the work. Out of doors, street and sewer departments, 
drivers of teams, coal drivers, etc., can work 9 to 10 hours daily with- 
out detriment. The machinist and factory operative, male adult, can 
work from 7 to 10 hours, dependent upon the speed demanded and 
the character of labor. In many of these cases, from poor ventilation, 
overheating and unsanitary conditions, 7 hours a day is sufficient. 

In a general way, I should say that shoemakers, carpenters, plumbers 
and employees in such occupations can work to better advantage to 
themselves and to the public in general for 10 hours a day. 

As to the Work Day for Women. — Extracts from letters 
follow : — 

My opinion may seem erratic, but in my position I come frequently 
into contact with women who work when they should be in bed. They 
work because they have had the position of breadwinner of the family 
forced upon them, either through death or sickness of male members 
of the family. A woman is a more conscientious worker than a man, 
as a rule, and applies herself close to it. She also has more home 
duties to take care of when her mill work is over, thus adding perhaps 
20 or 30 hours a week to her factory employment, while the male 
workers are out on the corners or strolling about seeking fresh air 
and recreation. 

It has seemed to me that the shortening of hours of labor for both 
male and female has been in the line of good as regards " health, 
longevity and efficiency ; " especially in the case of young married or 
unmarried women it is wise, as in my observation the offspring of 
women working in our mills are not so vigorous as those whose parents 
have more freedom, more out-door life. Young women of marriageable 
age in impaired health from any cause should not be allowed in our 
mills, because of the effect upon their offspring. 

I think the average female adult wage earner can toil as many hours 
as the male, taking into consideration the fact that she usually takes 
better care of herself in the hours from work, and does not frequent 



464 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



the saloon. During menstrual week the average female should do less 
work, from one-third to one-half, if it were possible or feasible. 

I think the average female adult cannot undertake labor outside her 
own house without endangering her life. The average female adult 
is married and has children. She is obliged to care for her children 
and do her housework. If she attempts more than this, she is sure 
to injure her health. 

Factory girls must work less time, and 8 hours a day is sufficient; 
longer would be detrimental to their health. The law should consider 
the kind of work performed by the people, and the health and physical 
condition of the workers. 

Relative to females, it all depends on whether they are single or 
married, whether or not they have borne children, whether or not they 
are suffering with any of the diseases peculiar to their sex. If perfectly 
healthy, 42 hours. 

Telephone girls are overworked, also cash girls in stores. Many in- 
stances of breakdown in the former case have come to my observation. 
Something must be done to ease their nervous strain. 

An adult female who has no obligations other than some daily occu- 
pation of a commercial character could safely work 50 or 56 hours 
a week. 

As to the Age Limit for Minors. — In. the matter of the age 
limit for minors, the replies are thus summarized : — 



Boys. 



20, . 

18, . 

17, . 

16,. 

15,. 

14, . 

18-21, 

18-20, 

16-18, 

14-18, 

12-18, 

15-16, 

14-16, 

14-15, 



Age (Yeabs) 



Replies. 



Girls. 



20, 

18, 

17, 

16, 

15, 

14, 

18-21 

18-20 

15-18, 

14-18 

12-18 

15-16 

14-15 



Age (Years 



Replies. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 465 

It is to be noted that of these 51 physicians 34 record them- 
selves as saying that neither boys nor girls can undertake physi- 
cal gainful occupations during the hours customary in the fac- 
tories of Massachusetts at less than sixteen years of age, with- 
out danger of stunting physical development or endangering 
health. Comments follow : — 

I do not believe that a boy or girl should do long arduous duties 
before the age of twelve or thirteen years, and from this period until 
the sixteenth year should never do more than three or four months 
of work a year, giving the other eight or nine months to study and 
recreation. He should not begin work until he has passed his sixteenth 
and she her eighteenth year of age, when four to six months a year 
may be given to work with an average of from 5 to 7 hours a day, 
and at the age of seventeen to nineteen years they may gradually in- 
crease their labors. Should children from the age of fourteen to seven- 
teen years of age be required to work, their labors should never occupy 
more than 3 to 4 hours a day, or at the very most 4 to 6 hours. It is 
absolutely necessary for the child, the adolescent, to get all the fresh 
air and sunshine possible, so that when young manhood and woman- 
hood is reached they will be better able to accomplish their light or 
taskful duties with greater efficiency than they otherwise would. 

The later in life a child goes to work, the better will his or her 
physical condition be in later life, and he or she will make a better and 
healthier man or woman. Eighteen years is none too late for a child 
to begin the fight of existence. It will mean a stronger and better 
physically equipped generation to come. 

Many children should never be put into factories, but ought to be 
put to work upon the farm or in out-door occupations, especially the 
male sex; and for the females the good old-fashioned practice of 
training for servants and domestics would help much to improve the 
general health, and would incidentally help a little toward diminishing 
the high cost of living. 

The young male or female ought not to work in factories under 
sixteen years of age, at which time the motor side of life is developed, 
though the frame is still plastic to a degree, and if put to employment 
too heavy, might still lead to stunted growth and deformities endanger- 
ing health. 

In all cases it seems to me that the kind of labor is of fully as much 
importance as the number of hours. Children on farms are put to 
work very early, and many times have to make long days, 10 to 12 
hours, and keep in the best of health and make the strongest men 
and women. 



466 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

In both cases not till after puberty. Here is where the State laws 
go to smash. Age and puberty have no fixed relation. Six years dif- 
ference is very common; twelve to eighteen years are both inside the 
limits. It cannot be averaged with any justice. 

I think no one, male or female, should have continuous factory work 
until he has attained his physical growth, that depending on the indi- 
vidual, from sixteen to eighteen years. Before that time he might have 
a shorter hour day if necessity required. 

It is my experience, as surgeon for six large manufacturing con- 
cerns, with a pay roll of $1,667,000 per year, that the native-born 
female employee is subject to nervous disorder and ansemia if she is 
under eighteen years old. 

Any factory work under the age of eighteen years I honestly believe 
will cause grave injury to health development. 

Miscellaneous Comments. — Extracts follow : — 

Normal conditions do not exist in most of our cotton industries for the 
hygienic, physical and mental welfare of the operator. Ventilation 
is poorly regulated. The humidity in some of our mills, especially 
the mule room, is very high. Drinking cups are a source of contami- 
nation. The toilets are not cared for as thoroughly as they should be. 

Men and women get paid for what they accomplish. If the laws 
prevent capable men and women from working as much as they are 
able, then the law indirectly prevents men and women from earning 
all they are entitled to. 

In my opinion, ordinary labor under hygienic conditions is not harm- 
ful, nor are the long hours, so much as lack of proper food, irregular 
hours, poor ventilation, etc. 

It is not hard work nor long hours which causes sickness among 
working people; it is the unhygienic way in which they live. 

More harm is done by unsanitary conditions, both at home and at 
work, than by either hard work or length of hours. 

Special attention should be called to the following quotations, 
typical of the feeling of many of the physicians who replied to 
the inquiries : — 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 467 

I should say that so many things are involved, such as the men and 
women themselves, the kind of labor, habits of the persons, etc., that 
it is impossible to give anything like an accurate scientific answer. 

It is not what a man eats, it is what he digests. Men doing laborious 
work should not work as long as the men who do light work. This 
the laws, I think, do not consider. 

As between the various branches of human labor there can be no 
uniform rule of hours of employment. Different occupations must 
have different standards. 

Varies with the hereditary and physical constitution of the indi- 
vidual and the hygienic condition of his surroundings, both at home 
and at work. 

This raises the interesting question of whether a standard 
working day is of the greatest economic advantage to society, 
regardless of other considerations. Interesting as it is, how- 
ever, only elaborate investigation along purely scientific lines 
will furnish adequate data for conclusions. In this connection 
the opinion of Prof. Irving Fisher on the working day in re- 
lation to national vitality indicates the trend of enlightened 
economic opinion on the general question of reduction of 
hours 2 : — 

The present working day is a striking example of the failure to con- 
serve national vitality. In order to keep labor power unimpaired, the 
working day should be physiological, i.e., it should be such as would 
enable the average individual to completely recuperate over night. 
Otherwise, instead of a simple daily cycle, there is a progressive de- 
terioration. A reduction in the length of the working day would be 
a chief means of improving the vitality of workmen as well as the 
worth of life to them. The fatigue of workmen is largely traceable 
to their long working day, and serves to start a vicious circle. Fatigue 
puts the workman in an abnormal frame of mind. He seeks to deaden 
his fatigue by alcohol, tobacco, exciting amusements and excesses of 
various kinds. The momentary relief which he thereby obtains is pur- 
chased at the expense of an increasing susceptibility to fatigue, re- 
sulting sooner or later in complete depletion of his vital energies and 
in the contraction of tuberculosis or other fatal disease. The decrease 
in the length of the working day has not diminished the total output. 
It is not maintained that in all cases productivity will be as great in 

1 Report on National Vitality, pp. 45, 46. 



468 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

8 hours as in 9. Cases to the contrary could also be cited. The point 
to be insisted upon is not that it is profitable to an employer to make 
the working day shorter, for often it is not, but to show that it is 
profitable to the nation and the race. Continual fatigue is inimical to 
national vitality, and, however it may affect the commercial profits 
of the individual, it will in the end deplete the vital resources on which 
national efficiency depends. 

2. The Employees' Side. 
The contention of employers and others, that the present high 
prices are due to higher wages, shorter hours and alleged union 
restrictions, is disputed by representatives of organized labor. 
The clearest statement of the employees' side of this controversy 
which the commission has come upon is that submitted by John 
E. Tobin, president of the Boot and Shoe Workers Union. Mr. 
Tobin maintains that the labor cost of production in the boot and 
shoe industry has not been increased. While admitting that the 
wages of the shoe workers have been materially increased within 
recent years, he makes the positive assertion that the labor cost 
of production for making shoes has not increased a single cent 
per pair. This, he explains, is due to the following fact : — 

More and more subdivisions of the trade have been introduced, the 
operations simplified so that less skill is required to maintain the 
standard of workmanship, and each worker becomes a specialist; then, 
too, with the introduction of improved machinery, which has aided the 
subdivision, the total cost per pair has been kept down, while the 
daily wages have, as we say, increased. As an example of the sub- 
divisions in the trade, we might mention that in the stitching of the 
uppers alone, after they have left the cutting department and before 
they have reached the department where the soles are put on, there 
are 250 standard items for which a wage list has to be made for each 
operative, to which must be added the tremendous number of additional 
subdivisions in the remainder of the work required to produce a shoe. 

In further support of his contention that the labor cost of 
production has not risen, Mr. Tobin calls attention to the effect 
of inventions and improvements in the processes of manufac- 
ture, as follows : — 

Many new and important machines and improvements upon old ma- 
chines have been made during recent years. For example : the rapid 
Goodyear stitcher ; the pulling-over and assembling system in the lasting 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 

department; the rapid welter, and the most recent innovation, the 
clicking or cutting machine, both of great importance and great labor- 
savers, and both calling for great physical effort upon the part of the 
operator and great speed, — which cheapens production, to say nothing 
of the saving in stock by the clicking machine, roughly estimated at 5 
per cent. Practically all of this economy in production goes to the 
shoe manufacturer, and only a small per cent, to the workmen, with 
no consideration given to the workers who have been displaced by the 
introduction of labor-saving machinery. 

A few years ago the operation of sewing the welt and then stitching 
the sole to the welt was done bj' hand labor, at a cost of 40 to 50 cents 
per pair, or full three-fourths of the entire labor cost of the present 
day. At the present time, with the aid of machinery, these same op- 
erations are done more uniformly at a labor cost of less than 5 cents 
per pair, or less than one-twelfth of the total labor cost. 

Mr. Tobin also holds that the consolidation of the shoe ma- 
chinery interests has been an advantage to the manufacturers. 
He says : — 

A few years ago the system of rival machinery companies in the 
shoe trade led to serious conflicts between the machinery interests, in 
which the shoe manufacturer and the unions or shoe workers were 
necessarily involved. These conflicting interests led to frequent strikes, 
the result of which was disastrous to the shoe worker, as well as 
disturbing to the manufacturer. 

Finally, Mr. Tobin maintains that there has been no deteriora- 
tion in the efficiency of labor in the boot and shoe industry. He 
challenges the statement that the quality and quantity of work- 
manship have fallen off, and declares that, on the contrary : — 

With close supervision by foremen, inspectors or crowners, as they 
are called, if the slightest inaccuracy or imperfection in the work is 
detected, the workmen are required to do it over and come up to a 
certain standard of workmanship, the requirements of which increase 
not only each year, but each of the two seasons of the year, so that 
the quality of the work, and of necessity the quantity of work, re- 
quired to do a given task become greater each year. 

He is emphatic in the statement that the increase of wages 
in boot and shoe making does not cost the manufacturer any 
more, that the latter is not paying any more for the labor cost 
in his shoe to-day than he was ten years ago, even with all the 



470 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

variety in style and the consequent complication of the labor 
process in shoemaking. 

The testimony of Mr. Tobin is supported by that of other 
representatives of the Boot and Shoe Workers Union. John P. 
Meade declares that whatever increase in wages or reductions 
in hours of labor have taken place have been more than overcome 
by the introduction of new appliances, new methods and im- 
proved machinery for production. lie also disputes flatly the 
statements of employers to the effect that the efficiency of labor 
in the shoe industry is not so great to-day as it was some years 
ago. 

Those of its who have access to the actual conditions, and who have 
associated with the men employed in the shoe industry during the past 
decade, know that that statement will not bear investigation, even 
though we are ready to admit that possibly it was an honest mistake 
made on the part of those gentlemen. We hold that the efficiency of 
labor to-day in the shoe factories is greater than it was some years ago. 
I believe one particular thing in connection with that question ought 
to be understood by this commission, and that is, that the general, 
all-round shoemakers, of whom there are very few in our industry to- 
day, are working for less earnings than those they received ten, twelve 
or fifteen years ago, in spite of our organization. I do not mean to 
say that no improvements have been made. I want to bear out Mr. 
Tobin when he says improvements have been made. They have been 
made, but whatever expense has been entailed by those improvements 
which have been referred to has been more than overcome by econ- 
omies in machinery, in methods and in material. 

C. A. Kelly of Brockton denies thai: the reduction in working 
hours has had much to do with the increased cost of shoes, and 
affirms that the workers do at the present time as much work 
under a 9-hour system as formerly in 10 hours. 

Arthur M. Huddell of the Building Trades Council of Boston 
argued before the commission that the increase of wages in the 
building trades and the restriction of apprentices cannot be con- 
strued as a reason for the increased cost of living. He testi- 
fies:— 

It is true that the building trades have received a larger increase 
in wages than any other industry; they are better organized and have 
received larger increases of wages than any other class of organized 
workmen : but. again, we have, the same as the shoemaker, the im- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 471 

proved machinery that has come into the building trades. I have in 
mind at the present time the iron worker who works on the buildings 
and erects the iron and drives the rivets. Ten years ago he was receiv- 
ing 2S cents an hour; to-day he is receiving 50 cents an hour. Ten 
years ago he drove the rivets by hand, and a fair day's work for a 
gang of riveters with four in the gang was about four hundred, — 
that would be an average day's work; at the present time they have 
a pneumatic tool that drives the rivets, and instead of having four 
men in a gang they have three men, and instead of driving four hun- 
dred rivets they drive twice as many as that, on an average, on a new 
building. To show you how fair I want to be in these figures, when 
we say they drive twice as many with one less man, — on the West 
Boston bridge which goes to Cambridge there was a gang of riveters 
on the girders that drove 2,200 rivets a day, which could not have 
been done by hand ; they might possibly have driven 500 — it was 
straight work — at the best by hand, and that gang drove 2,200 rivets 
every day that they worked on that straightaway work. Now, that 
was over four times as many as could have been driven by hand, and 
yet we claim that the machine only drives twice as many. 

3. Conclusion. 

The commission is not in a position to express positive, well- 
grounded opinions on the actual effect of changes in wages and 
hours and of trade union influence upon the labor cost of pro- 
duction in different industries. It would require thorough re- 
search into the exact facts as to trade union practices and as to 
the relation of wages and hours to the volume of output, in order 
to answer this question. Other facts, also, that enter into the 
determination of cost of production, such as the price of ma- 
terials, the introduction of new machinery, the matter of rentals 
and taxes, would have to be determined. The detailed and ex- 
tended investigations necessary to get at these facts could not 
possibly be undertaken within the time placed at the disposal of 
this commission. The members of the commission are agreed, 
however, on certain general conclusions regarding the broad ques- 
tion of the alleged responsibility of labor organizations for the 
recent advance of prices. They are of the opinion that the 
trade unions cannot be regarded as a factor of any considerable 
importance in the upward price movement of recent years. The 
causes of the advance of prices are to be found elsewhere than in 
the influence of organized labor. 

Attention may be directed to certain facts that have a most 



472 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

important bearing on this question. In the first place, it is to 
be noted that less than 10 per cent, of the workers of the country 
are organized. The estimated total population of the United 
States in 1910 is roundly 94,000,000. The twelfth census of 
1900 gives the number of persons engaged in gainful occupa- 
tions as 29,285,922. If the same proportion of gainfully em- 
ployed persons holds now as in 1900, there are at present over 
36,000,000 workers in the country. The American Federation 
of Labor claims a membership of about 2,000,000. The total 
number of workers in all organizations in the country could not, 
on the most extravagant estimate, reach 3,000,000. It is not 
reasonable to argue that the action of this small proportion of 
the total number of workers is responsible for the general ad- 
vance of prices. 

In the second place, workers engaged in the production of the 
commodities that have risen most during recent years are hardly 
organized at all. This is true of agricultural labor, employed 
in the production of food. Whatever trade union influence may 
have accomplished in certain industries, it has not affected con- 
ditions in agriculture. 

In the third place, an examination of the upward course 
of wages and prices in the recent period of advance shows that 
the former have risen in less degree and at slower pace than the 
latter. The wage advance appeared in the wake of the price in- 
crease as a consequence or offset, rather than as a primary cause. 
The advance of wages over the low point of the 90's did not set 
in until some time after the upward movement of prices began. 
Retail prices reached the low mark in 1896 and began the up- 
ward movement in 1897. Wages showed no general or marked 
tendency to advance until several years later. A glance at the 
curves of wages and prices on the chart opposite page 88 
will show this fact clearly. The fact that the advance of wages 
set in long after the increase of prices is in itself conclusive evi- 
dence that the rise of prices cannot be attributed to recent wage 
increases. 

In fact, the increase of wages and other improvements in the 
condition of labor have come about as effect, result or conse- 
quence of the upward movement of prices. It is because the 
cost of living to the laborer has been increased by the advance of 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 473 

prices that he has been compelled to demand more in wages. 
Also, it is because the prices of the products of industry have 
risen that employers have been able to raise wages. The chain 
of cause and effect runs from high prices to high wages, and 
not in the opposite direction. 

It is true that the necessity of paying higher wages usually 
increases the labor cost of production to the employer. This 
holds true unless the efficiency of labor and the amount of the 
product are increased in the same proportion as wages. This 
may tend to take place in the long run through increased effi- 
ciency of labor and technical improvements in production, but 
in the first instance higher wages commonly mean increased 
labor cost. The employer who is getting higher prices for his 
products can, however, reasonably bear an increased expense of 
production involved in the advance of wages. The higher wages 
may be regarded as the share of the higher prices due to the wage 
earner. This is unquestionably the fair and right view of the 
present situation as regards the relation between high prices and 
high wages. The latter stand in the relation of effect, not cause, 
to the former. The higher pay of labor is not a tax on industry, 
which has necessitated an increase of prices, but it is the worker's 
share of the increase of prices brought about by other factors, 
over which labor, organized or unorganized, has no control. 

The deeper question, as to whether the actual efficiency of 
labor has fallen off in recent years, cannot be answered by such 
statistical evidence as is available. Manifestly, the increase of 
wages and the reduction of hours ought to be accompanied by an 
increase of efficiency, and must be so accompanied if the higher 
level of remuneration is to be maintained in the long run. If 
the efficiency of labor should fall off while wages are advancing 
and the working time is being shortened, this would represent an 
increasing handicap upon industry, which must operate to raise 
the prices of products. It would require an exhaustive investi- 
gation into the conditions of production in different industries 
to determine whether the efficiency of labor has been maintained 
or reduced. In the absence of facts, figures and conclusive evi- 
dence on this point, an expression of opinion would be idle and 
useless. 

In general, then, the conclusion may be laid down that the 



474 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

increased cost of labor, imposed by advance of wages and re- 
duction of hours, is not a cause of present high prices, but rather 
an effect of the latter. No statement based upon trustworthy 
data can be made as to the efficiency of labor at the present time 
in comparison with earlier periods. This is all that may be said 
regarding the influence of trade unions and their policies upon 
the present level of prices. 

The conclusion of the commission on this general question is 
supported by the verdict of economic experts. The common 
opinion of political economists with reference to the part played 
by trade unions in the recent advance in prices is well expressed 
by Prof. Irving Fisher of Yale University, in a paper in the 
March number of the " Review of Reviews ," as follows : — 

From no point of view can the conclusion be justified that the main 
cause of the present rise in cost of living is due to labor unions. This 
rise in cost is world-wide, being felt in Europe and even in India, 
where American labor unions and labor leaders cannot, by the utmost 
stretch of imagination, be supposed to dominate the situation. More- 
over, so far as American statistics show, such as those of Bradstreet 
and the Department of Commerce and Labor, wages have risen only 
about half as fast as the cost of living. If it were true that the in- 
creasing demands of labor unions, by increasing the cost of producing 
commodities, had resulted in a general increase of prices, these would 
surely have risen more slowly than wages. The facts, however, show 
that the cost of living has increased about twice as fast as wages, and 
this seems to be approximately the rule during any period of rising 
prices. In other words, during rising prices the laborer is the loser. 
In fact, hie strikes and insistent demands for higher wages represent 
a belated attempt to overtake the advancing cost of living. Labor 
disputes and demands are thus an almost invariable accompaniment of 
rising prices, but they are effects of rising prices, not causes. 

G. LEGISLATION. 

Legislation for the protection of labor and the public health 
imposes a certain tax on industry. It increases, for a time 
at least, the expenses of production and distribution, and is 
paid for by consumers in the form of higher prices of products. 
So far as this legislation is necessary to attain the ends sought 
and is effective in securing its intended results, the tax that it 
imposes is a reasonable price for the advantages secured. In 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 475 

the main, moreover, such legislation proves economical in the 
long run, for it conserves and increases productive efficiency. 
The temporary increase of the cost of production is offset in the 
end by the heightened productive powers of the population. But 
it must be recognized that even if such legislation results in a 
permanent increase of the expenses of production, it can be jus- 
tified on higher ethical grounds. Cheaper production is not the 
only aim of social progress. A body of law that yields substan- 
tial values throughout the nation in the form of good health, 
sound morals and intelligent citizenship, is well worth the price 
of a permanent increase of production cost. 

During the last decade there have been notable additions to 
the laws designed to conserve and improve the public health. 
The national pure food act of 1906 and the beef inspection law 
of 1907 are the most conspicuous measures of this class. In 
Massachusetts the sanitary and labor codes also have been ex- 
tended. It would be idle to deny that this new legislation has 
played no part whatever in the increase of prices. It may be 
affirmed, however, that the influence in this direction is so slight 
as to be practically negligible, when weighed against the solid 
advantages which the new laws have brought or promise to 
bring. 

The effect upon prices of the United States food and drugs 
act, passed June 30, 1906, is touched upon in the report of the 
Chemist of the Bureau of Agriculture for the year 1907. It 
is stated that the influence upon prices has been in only one 
direction. Many food products of purity and excellence, which 
before the enactment of the food and drugs act were subject to 
the uniform competition of inferior adulterated and unbranded 
articles, have through the enforcement of the new law been 
freed from this handicap. In consequence, prices have tended 
to advance. Further than this, the act is declared to have had 
no effect upon prices. 

The leading provisions of recent legislation in this field, na- 
tional and State, are briefly summarized in the following out- 
line : — 



476 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

1. National Legislation. 
Pure Food. 

The act of June 30, 1906, provides that it shall be unlawful 
for any person to manufacture, in any Territory or in the Dis- 
trict of Columbia, any article of food or drug which is adul- 
terated or misbranded. (Section 1.) It prohibits the use of 
any adulterated or misbranded articles of food or drugs in in- 
terstate or foreign commerce. The shipping and receiving of 
such articles in interstate commerce are both prohibited, and 
likewise the receiving in any State or Territory or the District 
of Columbia and delivery in original unbroken packages of any 
such articles. (Section 2.) The Secretary of the Treasury, 
the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Commerce 
and Labor are required to make uniform rules and regulations 
for carrying out the provisions of this act, including the collec- 
tion and examination of specimens of food and drugs offered for 
sale contrary to the provisions of the act. (Section 3.) Food 
and drugs thus collected are to be examined by the Bureau of 
Chemistry of the Department of Agriculture, and if, upon exam- 
ination, they appear to be adulterated or misbranded, the party 
from whom they are seized is given notice and an opportunity to 
be heard. If it then appears that the provisions of the act have 
been violated, the Secretary of Agriculture is required at once 
to certify the facts to the proper United States District Attorney, 
whose duty it is to cause appropriate proceedings to be com- 
menced without delay. (Sections 4 and 5.) 

The term " drugs " includes all medicines and preparations 
recognized in the L nited States Pharmacopoeia or National For- 
mulary for internal or external use, or any substance intended to 
be used for the cure, mitigation or prevention of disease of either 
man or other animals. The term " food " includes all articles 
used for food, drink, confectionery or condiment by man or 
other animals. (Section 6.) 

Drugs are deemed to be adulterated : — 

1. If, when a drug is sold under a name recognized in the 
United States Pharmacopoeia or National Formulary, it differs 
from the standard of strength, quality or purity as determined 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 477 

by the test laid down therein ; provided, that no such drug shall 
be deemed adulterated if the standard of strength, quality or 
purity be plainly stated upon the bottle, box or other container 
thereof. 

2. If its strength or purity shall fail below the professed stan- 
dard or quality under which it is sold. 

Food is deemed to be adulterated : — 

1. If any substance has been mixed and packed with it so as 
to reduce or lower or injuriously affect its quality or strength. 

2. If any substance has been substituted wholly or in part for 
the article. 

3. If any valuable constituent of the article has been wholly 
or in part abstracted. 

4. If it is mixed, colored, powdered, coated or stained in a 
manner whereby damage or inferiority is concealed. 

5. If it contains any added poisonous or other added deleteri- 
ous ingredient which may render such article injurious to health ; 
provided, that food products for shipment may be preserved by 
any external application applied in such a manner that the pre- 
servative is necessarily removed mechanically or by water or 
otherwise, if the directions for the removal are printed on the 
covering of the package. 

6. If it consists in whole or part of a filthy, decomposed or 
putrid animal or vegetable substance, or any portion of an animal 
unfit for food, or if it is the product of a diseased animal, or one 
that has died otherwise than by slaughter. (Section 7.) 

The term " misbranded " applies to all drugs or articles of 
food the package or label of which bears any statement, design 
or advice regarding such article or its ingredients which is false 
or misleading. The article is also deemed to be " misbranded " 
within the meaning of the act in the case of drugs : — 

1. If it is an imitation of or offered for sale under the name 
of another article. 

2. If the contents of the package as originally put up have 
been removed in whole or in part, and other contents have been 
placed in such package ; or if the package fails to bear a state- 
ment on the label of the quantity or proportion of any alcohol, 
morphine, opium, cocaine, etc., contained therein. 



478 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

In the case of food : — 

1. If it is an imitation of or offered for sale under the dis- 
tinctive name of another article. 

2. If it is labeled or branded so as to deceive or mislead the 
purchaser; or purports to be a foreign article when not so; or 
if the contents of the package as originally put up have been re- 
moved in whole or part, and other contents have been placed in 
such package; or if it fails to bear a statement on the label of 
the quantity or proportion of any morphine, opium, cocaine, 
etc. 

3. If the food is in package form, and the contents are stated 
in terms of weight or measure, if they are not plainly stated on 
the outside of the package. 

4. If the package containing the food or its label shall bear 
any statement, design or advice regarding its ingredients which 
is false or misleading in any particular. (Section 8.) 

Section 9 provides that no dealer shall be prosecuted under 
the provisions of the act when he can establish a guaranty signed 
by the wholesaler or other party residing in the United States, 
from whom he purchased such articles, to the effect that the 
same is not adulterated or misbranded within the meaning of the 
act. This guaranty must also contain the name and address of 
the party who sells to the purchaser, and he is amenable to pros- 
ecution under the act. 

By section 10 any article of food or drug that is adulterated 
or misbranded within the meaning of the act may be seized for 
confiscation by a process of libel for condemnation while it is 
being transported in interstate or foreign commerce ; or, having 
been transported, if it remains unloaded, unsold or in original 
unbroken packages ; or if it be sold or offered for sale in the 
District of Columbia or the Territories ; and if the article is 
condemned as being adulterated or misbranded it is to be dis- 
posed of by destruction or sale, as the court may direct; but 
upon payment of costs and giving a bond to the effect that such 
articles shall not be disposed of or sold contrary to the pro- 
visions of this act, the owner may obtain possession of them. 

In section 11 provision is made for the prevention of the im- 
portation of adulterated or misbranded goods. The Secretary 
of the Treasury is required to deliver to the Secretary of Agri- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 479 

culture, upon his request, any samples of food or drugs which 
are being imported; and if, upon examination, it appears that 
their importation is contrary to the provisions of the act, the 
Secretary of the Treasury is required to refuse delivery to the 
consignee, and to cause the destruction of the goods if they are 
not exported within three months from the date of notice of 
refusal of admittance. 

Meat Inspection. 

By act of Congress of May 4, 1907, provisions were made 
for the more effective inspection of the slaughtering of animals 
and preparing them for food. These provisions, or at least so 
far as they relate to the stamping and branding of animals, as 
noted below, are by Massachusetts statute required in Massa- 
chusetts with regard to animals not the subject of interstate 
commerce. By this act the Secretary of Agriculture is required 
to appoint inspectors, who shall examine and inspect all cattle, 
sheep, swine and goats before they are allowed to enter any 
slaughterhouse, canning, meat-packing, rendering or similar 
establishment in which they are to be slaughtered, and the meat 
or meat food products thereof are to be used for interstate or 
foreign commerce. All animals that show symptoms of disease 
are to be set apart, slaughtered separately and their carcasses 
carefully examined. The carcasses of all animals are to be ex- 
amined, and those found to be sound, healthful, wholesome and 
fit for food are to be marked by the inspector " Inspected and 
passed." If found to be unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome or 
otherwise unfit for human food, they are to be destroyed for food 
products in the presence of the inspector. All meat and meat 
food products are to be put in cans, tins or other receptacles, 
under the supervision of the inspector, and labeled " Inspected 
and passed." Furthermore, all places where slaughtering, can- 
ning, packing, rendering, etc., for interstate or foreign com- 
merce are carried on are required to be examined by experts in 
sanitation ; and if the sanitary conditions are such that the meat 
or meat food products therein prepared are rendered unsound, 
unhealthful, unwholesome or otherwise unfit for human food, 
the inspector is required to refuse to allow the products of such 
an establishment to be marked " Inspected and passed." The 



480 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

transportation of goods not marked " Inspected and passed " is 
prohibited. 

Furthermore, all cattle, sheep, swme and goats and all car- 
casses of the same, and meat and meat food products of the same 
intended for exportation from the United States are required to 
be inspected, and if found to be sound and healthful, the in- 
spector is required to give a certificate of condition; and no 
clearance is to be given any vessel having any of the said food 
products on board unless they are accompanied by the inspect- 
ing certificate that they are sound and healthful, and no person 
is allowed to transport in interstate commerce such meat and 
meat food products until all the provisions of the act are com- 
plied with. But the provisions are not to apply to animals 
slaughtered by farmers on their farms, nor to retail butchers 
or dealers, who, however, are subject to penalties if they trans- 
port, in interstate commerce, meat or meat food products un- 
sound, unhealthful, unwholesome or unfit for human food. 

Provision is also made in this act for the investigation by the 
Bureau of Chemistry of the Department of Agriculture of all 
adulteration, false labeling and false branding of drugs, food, 
beverages, condiments and the ingredients of such articles, when 
deemed advisable by the Secretary of Agriculture; and also of 
the effect of cold storage on the healthfulness of food, and the 
effects of food preservatives and coloring matters upon diges- 
tion and health. 

2. Massachusetts Legislation. 

Pure Food. 

The Massachusetts statutes in regard to adulterated drugs 
and food are contained in Revised Laws, chapter 75, sections 16 
to 27 inclusive. It is therein provided that no person shall man- 
ufacture, sell or offer for sale within this Commonwealth any 
drug or article of food which is adulterated. The term " drug " 
(section 16) includes all medicines for internal or external use, 
antiseptics, disinfectants and cosmetics. The term " food and 
drugs " includes all articles, simple, mixed or compound, used 
in food or drink. A drug is deemed to be adulterated if it 
differs from the standard of strength, quality or purity pre- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 481 

scribed by the United States Pharmacopoeia, or if its strength, 
quality or purity falls below the express standard under which 
it is sold. Food is deemed to be adulterated if any substance 
has been mixed with it so as to reduce, depreciate or injuriously 
affect its quality, strength or purity; if an inferior or cheaper 
substance has been substituted for it wholly or in part, or any 
valuable or necessary ingredient has been taken from it ; if it 
is an imitation of or sold under the name of another article; 
if it consists wholly or in part of a diseased or tainted animal or 
vegetable substance ; if it is colored or coated in such a manner 
as to conceal its damaged or inferior condition, or if by any 
means it is made to appear better or of greater value than it is ; 
or if it contains any added substance or ingredient which is 
poisonous or injurious to health. These provisions were made 
by various acts from 1882 to 1897. 

In 1901, by chapter 341 of the Acts of that year, it was fur- 
ther provided that food should be deemed adulterated if it 
contained any added antiseptic or preservative substance except 
common table salt, saltpeter, cane sugar, alcohol, vinegar, spice, 
or, in smoked food, the natural products of the smoking process, 
unless the article bears a label on which the presence and the 
percentage of every such antiseptic or preservative substance are 
clearly indicated. By sections 25-26, chapter 75 of the He- 
vised Laws, it is also made a criminal offence to adulterate any 
food or drug with any substance injurious to the health, for 
the purpose of sale. Chapter 180 of the Acts of 1907 prohibits 
the distribution by any method of drugs or other substances 
that may be in any way injurious or harmful to those who use 
them. 

The sale of patent medicines was regulated by chapter 386 of 
the Acts of 1906. By the terms of that act every patent or 
proprietary medicine or food product is required to have marked 
upon the package that contains it a statement of the percentage 
of alcohol by volume contained therein ; and the same provi- 
sion is made with regard to such medicines and food as contain 
opium, morphine, heroin or chloral-hydrate. It is also made un- 
lawful by this act to sell any articles containing cocaine, except 
upon the written prescription of a physician. The State Board 
of Health is required to enforce the provisions of the act. 



482 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Acts of 1908, chapter 307, and Acts of 1909, chapter 375, 
prohibit the manufacture of preparations containing cocaine, 
and prohibit the selling or giving away of such compounds. 

Milk Inspection. 

The statutes with regard to the inspection of milk are con- 
tained in Revised Laws, chapter 56, sections 51 to 69 inclusive. 
By section 51 the appointment of inspectors of milk was vested 
in the mayor and aldermen of cities and the selectmen of towns. 
In general, they had power to issue licenses to milk dealers, 
and to enter all places in which milk is stored or kept for sale 
and take samples therefrom for analysis. By Acts of 1909, 
chapter 405, the appointment of inspectors was vested in local 
boards of health ; and by the same act all milk dealers were made 
subject to regulations imposed by local boards of health, who 
were given the power to refuse licenses or to revoke licenses al- 
ready issued unless their regulations were complied with. In 
all cases where a license is refused or revoked by the order of 
the board of health, an appeal is allowed to the State Board of 
Health, whose decision is made final. 

By another act of the same year, Acts of 1909, chapter 443, 
sections 53-54 of chapter 56 of the Revised Laws were super- 
seded. The new act provided in substance that milk dealers 
should display conspicuously on the outside of carriages and 
other vehicles used in their business the license number in figures 
not less than one-half inch in height, and the name and place 
of business of the licensee in Gothic letters of the same size. 
It also contained the provision empowering local boards of 
health to establish regulations and to refuse or revoke licenses 
for failure to comply therewith. It prohibited dealing in milk 
without license from the milk inspector, as does section 53, 
chapter 56 of the Revised Laws. 

Section 56 of chapter 56 of the Revised Laws defined the 
term " milk of good standard quality " as milk that upon 
analysis is shown to contain, in April, May, June, July, August 
and September, not less than twelve per cent, of milk solids, or 
less than 9 per cent, of milk solids exclusive of fat, or less than 
3 per cent, of fat; and in the other months to contain not less 
than 13 per cent, of milk solids, or less than 9.3 per cent, of 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 483 

milk solids exclusive of fat, or less than 3.7 per cent, of fat. 
The Acts of 1908, chapter 643, changed this standard, and made 
the test uniform for the entire year, as follows : milk that upon 
analysis is shown to contain less than 12.15 per cent, of milk 
solids or less than 3.35 per cent, of fat was considered not of 
good standard quality. The provisions of the Revised Laws 
contained in chapter 56, section 57, prohibiting the selling, 
exchanging or delivering of milk that is not of good standard 
quality, and providing a penalty therefor, remain unchanged. 

Section 55 of chapter 56 of the Revised Laws made it a 
criminal offense for any person to sell, exchange or deliver, or to 
have in his possession with intent to sell, exchange or deliver, 
or expose or offer for sale or exchange, adulterated milk or milk 
to which water or any foreign substance had been added, or 
milk produced from cows which had been fed on refuse of 
distilleries, or from sick or diseased cows, or as pure milk 
from which the cream or a part thereof had been removed; 
and also to sell, exchange or deliver, or to have in custody with 
intent to sell, exchange or deliver, skimmed milk containing less 
than 9.3 per cent, of milk solids exclusive of fat. By section 58 
of the same chapter sellers of milk from which the cream or a 
part thereof has been removed are required to have the words 
" skimmed milk " distinctly in a conspicuous place upon every 
vessel from which such milk is sold; and by section 59 of the 
same chapter whoever sells condensed milk or skimmed con- 
densed milk in sealed cans is required to have such cans dis- 
tinctly labeled with the name of the manufacturer of such milk, 
the brand under which it is made and the contents of the can. 
None of these provisions have been changed since 1900. 

The Acts of 1907, chapter 216, prohibited the sale of cream 
containing less than 15 per cent, of milk fat, and provided a 
penalty therefor. This was a new statutory provision. 

By Acts of 1901, chapter 202, also contained in Revised 
Laws, chapter 56, section 65-69 inclusive, provision was made 
for the testing of utensils used at creameries, cheese factories 
and condensed-milk factories, milk depots and other places, and 
determining by test the value of milk or cream received from 
different persons at such places. The said utensils were re- 
quired before use to be tested for accuracy, under the super- 



484 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

vision of the Director of the Hatch Experiment Station of the 
Massachusetts Agricultural College, at the expense of the 
owners. 

By chapter 116 of the Acts of 1906 certain sanitary condi- 
tions were established with regard to vessels used in the sale of 
milk. Persons having custody of such vessels were prohibited 
from placing in them any offal, swill, kerosene, vegetable 
matter or any article other than milk or water or other agent 
used in cleaning said vessels. Provision was also made, in 
section 3 of the same act, that every licensed milk dealer who 
received milk contained in receptacles which were the property 
of another person should transfer said milk, before selling it, 
to other clean vessels bearing his own name. By the Acts of 
1908, chapter 435, it was further provided that every licensed 
milk dealer who had in his possession, with intent to sell, milk 
not contained in clean vessels bearing his own name, and bear- 
ing no other name, should be punished by fine of $10 for each 
offense, unless he had the written permission for such use from 
the person whose name the vessel bears, and had registered this 
written permit in the office of the milk inspector. 

By chapter 570 of the Acts of 1908 it was provided that every 
person who sold, or had in his custody or possession with intent 
to sell, milk which had been subjected to artificial heat greater 
than 167° F. should have the words " heated milk 7 ' distinctly 
marked in plain black Gothic letters, at least one inch in length, 
upon a light ground, in a conspicuous place upon every vessel 
from which said milk was to be sold. Failure to comply with 
the provisions of this act was made punishable by fine. 

Chapter 369 of the Acts of 1900 and chapter 360 of the 
Acts of 1901, contained in section 43 of chapter 62 of the He- 
vised Laws, provided that all bottles or jars used for the 
distribution of milk or cream to consumers should be annually 
examined and sealed by the sealers of weights and measures in 
cities and towns. By chapter 531 of the Acts of 1909 manu- 
facturers were empowered to seal their bottles with name, 
initials or trademark, and by any other mark that the Com- 
missioner of Weights and Measures might require, such sealing 
to be instead of that otherwise required on the part of local 
sealers. When a bottle or jar has once been sealed, it is not 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 485 

necessary to have it sealed again thereafter. By chapter 323 
of the Acts of 1906 any sealer of weights and measures, who 
has been notified by any dealer in milk or cream that he has in 
his possession not less than six gross of such glass bottles or 
jars that have not been sealed, is required forthwith to have 
them sealed, and the owner is required to pay a fee of 50 cents 
a gross therefor. 

Chapter 359 of the Acts of 1900, contained in Revised Laws, 
chapter 72, sections 19 and 23 inclusive, provides that any 
milk dealer who has the word " registered " branded or other- 
wise produced in a permanent manner upon his cans or jars 
may file in the office of the city or town clerk where he does 
business, and also in the office of the Secretary of the Common- 
wealth, a description of the name used by him: and after so 
filing and also publishing such description in the manner pre- 
scribed by the statute, it is thereafter made a criminal offense 
for any one to use any of such cans without the consent of the 
owner, or to wilfully destroy, mutilate or deface them, or to 
put any unclean or foul substance into them. 

Inspection of Provisions and Meat. 

By chapter 56, section 35 et seq., of the Revised Laws, pro- 
visions were made regarding the sale of oleomargarine and 
butterine, and requiring them to be marked. None of these 
provisions has been changed within the past ten years. In 
1899 the sale of renovated butter was regulated. By chapter 
340 of the Acts of that year it was provided that any person 
who sells any article or compound that is produced by taking 
the original packing stock or other butter, melting the same 
so that the butter fat can be drawn off, mixing the said butter 
fat with skimmed milk or milk or cream or other milk prod- 
ucts and rechurning the mixture, or by any similar process, 
shall have the words " renovated butter " conspicuously marked 
thereon in a prescribed manner. The statute provided a penalty 
tor violation of these provisions, and by Acts of 1903, chapter 
361, the penalty was somewhat changed, but the act remained 
unchanged in every other respect. 

Sections 70 to 76 inclusive of chapter 56 of the Revised Laws 
provide for the inspection of meat, provisions, etc. Boards 



486 COST OF LIVING, [May, 

of health of cities and towns are given authority to inspect 
carcasses of all slaughtered animals, and all fish, meat, vege- 
tables, produce, fruit or provisions of any kind, and are given 
authority to enter any building in which said food stuffs are 
kept, for the purposes of inspection. They are given further 
authority to destroy any such carcasses or articles which they 
find tainted, diseased or otherwise unfit for food. By section 
71 they are given authority to seize and destroy all veal if it 
is from a calf which in their opinion was less than four weeks 
old when killed. It is made punishable by fine or imprison- 
ment, or both, to sell any unwholesome food or to sell for food 
the veal of a calf less than four weeks old. No substantial 
changes have been made in any of these provisions since 1900. 

Closely allied to these provisions are the regulations estab- 
lished by chapter 75, section 99 et seq., of the Revised Laws, 
in regard to the licensing of slaughterhouses by local boards of 
health. Provision is made therein for the presence of an 
inspector of animals, appointed by the Board of Health, in all 
licensed slaughterhouses when animals are slaughtered. Such 
inspectors are required carefully to examine the carcasses at 
the time of slaughter, and are authorized to cause any such 
carcasses found to be unwholesome or unfit for food to be 
seized and destroyed. By the Acts of 1901, chapter 391, con- 
tained in the Revised Laws, chapter 75, sections 103 and 104, 
if a slaughtering establishment is not carried on under the 
rules arjd regulations in regard to inspection and branding 
provided by the United States laws in force on the fifteenth 
day of June in the year 1901, the carcasses of animals slaugh- 
tered are required at the time of slaughter, if not condemned, 
to be stamped and branded by the local inspector in like 
manner as those inspected under the United States law. The 
sale of all carcasses of animals not stamped or branded in this 
manner is made punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both. 

By chapter 471 of the Acts of 1909 the words " in force on 
the fifteenth day of June in the year 1901 " were stricken from 
the above act; the result of this amendment is that animals 
slaughtered for food in this State must be stamped and branded 
in like manner as provided by the laws of the United States 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 487 

now in force, as changed by act of Congress passed March 4, 
1907. 

Chapter 329 of the Acts of 1908 prohibits the sale for use 
as food of the carcasses of any animal that has come to its 
death in any manner other than by killing in a healthy condi- 
tion, or which at the time of its death is unfit, by reason of 
disease, exhaustion, abuse, neglect, or otherwise, for use as 
food, or of any calf weighing less than forty pounds when 
dressed. The State Board of Health and local boards of health 
are required to enforce the provisions of the act, and visit and 
keep under observation all places in which animals are slaugh- 
tered. They are given authority to seize and destroy animals 
unfit for food, or the sale of which for food is unlawful. By 
section 5 of this act all slaughterhouses are placed under super- 
vision of the State Board of Health. 

By Revised Laws, chapter 75, section 91 et seq., boards of 
health of cities and towns are given supervision of all trades 
or employments that are a nuisance to or hurtful to anybody, 
or injurious to their health, or dangerous to the public health, 
or that are attended by noisome or injurious odors. They 
may prohibit the exercise of such trades within the limits of 
their cities or towns, and they may assign places for their 
exercise. Under the provisions of this section local boards have 
control of the keeping of swine, and no State legislation in 
regard to this has been passed within the last ten years. 

By the provisions of Acts of 1899. chapter 408. contained 
in chapter 90 of the Revised Laws, local authorities are required 
to appoint inspectors of animals, who may be removed by the 
Board of Cattle Commissioners, whose powers and duties were 
transferred to the Cattle Bureau of the State Board of Agri- 
culture by the Acts of 1902, chapter 16. These inspectors are 
under the control of this Board, and are required to make reg- 
ular and thorough inspection of all meat, cattle, sheep and 
swine within the limits of their several cities and towns. If 
upon examination these animals appear to be free from con- 
tagious disease, the inspectors are required to deliver to the 
owner or person in charge a written certificate of their condi- 
tion. If they are found to be affected with a contagious disease, 



488 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

the inspector is required to cause them to be immediately 
quarantined, at the expense of the owner. By Acts of 1908, 
chapter 378, inspectors of animals are required to be registered 
veterinary surgeons. 

Labor Laws, 1900-09. 

The age limit for the employment of children has not been 
changed since 1898, when it was fixed at fourteen years. The 
fourteen-year limit had been reached by gradual stages, the 
age of employment having first been set at ten years in 1866, 
raised to twelve years in 1883, to thirteen years in 1888, and 
finally to fourteen years in 1898. The limit applies to mer- 
cantile establishments as well as to factories and workshops. 
Furthermore, the present law forbids the employment of any 
child under the age of fourteen years " at work performed for 
wages or other compensation, to whomsoever payable, during 
the hours when the public schools of the city or town in which 
he resides are in session, or ... at work before six o'clock 
in the morning or after seven o'clock in the evening." (Re- 
vised Laws, chapter 106, section 28.) 

The educational restrictions as to the employment of children 
between the ages of fourteen and sixteen years have been 
stiffened considerably by recent legislation. By Acts of 1905, 
chapter 267, the employment of children under sixteen years of 
age was made conditional upon keeping on file an age and 
school certificate which certifies that he is able to read and write, 
whereas prior to 1905 it need only certify that he had attended 
school. In cases of minors over sixteen years of age who can- 
not furnish a certificate of ability to read and write, regular 
attendance at day school or night school is required as a con- 
dition of employment by Acts of 1902, chapter 183. By Acts 
of 1906, chapter 284, the ability to read and write was so 
defined as now to mean such ability to read and write as is 
required for admission to the fourth grade of the public schools. 
Various provisions have also been made for the better enforce- 
ment of age and educational restrictions upon the employment 
of children. 

The provisions of the labor code relating to the employment 
of women and minors have also been extended and re-enforced 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 489 

since 1900. The maximum limit of the weekly work time for 
women and minors was reduced in 1908 from fifty-eight hours, 
as fixed in 1892, to fifty-six hours in the case of manufacturing 
and mechanical establishments. (Acts of 1908, chapter 645.) 
The act in question provided that the hours of labor in such 
establishments should not exceed fifty-six in a week, " except 
that in any such establishment where the employment is by 
seasons, the number of such hours in a week may exceed fifty- 
six but not fifty-eight, provided that the total number of such 
hours in a year shall not exceed an average of fifty-six hours a 
week for the whole year, including Sundays and holidays." 
This new restriction, it will be observed, does not apply to 
mercantile establishments. The fifty-eight-hour limit, which 
was extended to apply to such establishments in 1900, still 
holds. (Acts of 1900, chapter 378.) The steps in the gradual 
extension of the limit of the weekly work time have been as 
follows: in 1880 the limit was first placed at sixty hours for 
manufacturing and mechanical establishments; in 1884 this 
restriction was extended to mercantile establishments; in 1892 
the limit was reduced to fifty-eight hours for manufacturing 
and mechanical establishments ; in 1900 this limit was extended 
to mercantile establishments; finally, in 1908, the limit was 
lowered to fifty-six hours for manufacturing and mechanical 
establishments. 

The maximum limit of ten hours for the daily work time 
in manufacturing and mechanical establishments also remains 
unchanged. This limit was first set for factories in 1874; it 
was extended to mechanical and mercantile establishments in 
1883 ; in 1902 the law was changed to its present form. (Acts 
of 1902, chapter 435.) The act of that year provides that 
" no child under eighteen years of age or young woman shall 
be employed in laboring in a manufacturing or mechanical 
establishment more than ten hours in any one day, except to 
provide for a shorter work day on one day of the week or 
to make up time lost on a previous day of the same week in 
consequence of the stopping of machinery.'' It is to be noted 
that the present ten-hour restriction does not apply to mercantile 
establishments. 

The question of overtime employment for women and minors 



490 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

has been a leading subject of agitation in recent years. In 1890 
it was enacted that no person and no officer of a person or cor- 
poration should employ any woman or minor for the purpose 
of manufacturing between ten o'clock at night and six o'clock in 
the morning. In 1907, by chapter 267 of the Acts of that year, 
this overtime law was further amended, so that it now pro- 
vides that no person, agent or official of a person or corporation 
engaged in the manufacturing of textile goods shall employ any 
minor under eighteen years of age, or any woman, before six 
o'clock in the morning and after six o'clock in the evening. 
A similar restriction was provided by Acts of 1901, chapter 
64, which prohibited the employment of children under eighteen 
years of age in the manufacturing of any acid which the State 
Board of Health has determined to be dangerous or injurious 
to the health. 

The nine-hour work day established in 1893 for public em- 
ployees was reduced to eight hours by chapter 517 of the Acts 
of 1906, and made to apply to all employees of cities and towns, 
of counties and of the Commonwealth. Amendments to pre- 
vent the evasion of this Act have since been adopted. Acts of 
1907, chapters 269 and 570, provide that no laborer in public 
employment shall be requested or required to work more than 
eight hours per day except in cases of extraordinary emer- 
gencies. Further, threat of loss of employment or to prevent 
obtaining of employment in the future is prohibited. 

Acts of 1907, chapter 577, prohibits the employment of 
workers engaged in commercial or industrial operations and 
in the work of transportation or communication upon the Lord's 
day, unless the employee in question is allowed during the six 
days next ensuing twenty-four consecutive hours without labor, 
" except in cases of emergency or except at the request of the 
employee," — the latter clause largely nullifying the purpose 
of the act. 



1910.1 HOUSE — No. 1750. 491 



IX. 
CHANGES IN DEMAND. 



A. POPULATION. 



The increasing urban concentration of population has been 
an influential factor in the increase of prices of the commodities 
of common consumption. The significance of the cityward 
drift of the population on the side of supply, in reducing 
the volume of agricultural production, has been pointed out 
elsewhere in this report. Not less potent is its influence in 
increasing the demand. City growth has unquestionably 
played a part in the advance of the cost of living. The 
great bulk of the population has been transferred from the 
ranks of food-producers in the country to the class of food- 
consumers in the city, and this at the same time has increased 
enormously the difficulty of distributing the food supply. The 
growth of the cities has also contributed to advance the cost 
of living in other ways than merely through the transfer 
of the population from the food-producing to the food-con- 
suming class. Everybody knows that city life is more ex- 
pensive than country life, in numberless respects. Various 
factors combine to make living costlier for the city dweller 
than for the rural resident. Among them are high rentals, 
due largely to high and constantly advancing land values ; 
the necessity for fire-proof construction; the cost of paving 
and cleaning the streets ; the expense of police and fire pro- 
tection; the outlay for sanitation, transportation and commu- 
nication by telephone and telegraph; increased outlay for 
recreation and amusement, for travel and vacation ; free spend- 
ing for newspapers and magazines; the growing practice of 
living from hand to mouth, and buying in small quantities; 
extension of credit buying instead of cash purchases ; the gener- 



492 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



ally higher scale of living; and the inevitable temptations to 
spend and waste. 

The herding together of aliens in cities gives birth to the 
tenement-house evil, which increases the bill for disease and 
death. It emphasizes the problems of crime and pauperism. 
It gives opportunity and immunity for municipal maladminis- 
tration and extravagance, which come back to all the people, 
and especially the wage earners, in the form of taxes not 
directly paid by them, but added to the cost of their rent, food, 
clothing and other supplies. 

The tendency to crowd into cities is not hard to understand. 
The average wage, including in this the items of food and 
shelter, is about as high during the working season for farm 
workers as is that of the ordinary unskilled labor in cities, but 
farm employment is, generally speaking, for only eight months 
in the year. The longer hours of labor incidental to farm 
life, its monotony, lack of social advantages, and absence of 
facilities for amusement, with on the other side the brightness 
and bustle of city conditions, impel men and women to leave the 
farm to seek work in the factories and shops of the cities. The 
psychological lure of the cities is irresistible. 

Foreign immigration has been a most important factor in 
the growth and concentration of population. The following 
table, giving the figures of population in Massachusetts by 
decades from 1820 to 1900, shows that were it not for alien 
immigration the State would not have been able to make the 
steady gain in population that has enabled it to keep its place 
as a manufacturing State. 



Year. 


Popula- 
tion of 
Massa- 
chusetts. 


Per Cent. 

Increase 
over Last 

Decade. 


Year. 


Popula- 
tion of 

Massa- 
chusetts. 


Per Cent. 

Increase 
over Last 

Decade . 


1820 


523,159 


- 


1870 


1,457,351 


18.3 


1830, .... 


610,408 


15.1 


1880, . . . 


1,783,085 


22.3 


1840 


737,699 


20.8 


1890, .... 


2,238,943 


25.6 


1850 


994,514 


34.8 


1900, .... 


2,805,346 


25.3 


1860 


1,231,066 


23.7 









This table shows that in the twenty years from 1820 to 1840, 
with practically no alien immigration, the average increase in 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 493 

population in Massachusetts was but 17.9 per cent. The Irish 
potato famine and the German revolution gave impetus to the 
first great tide of immigration, and doubled this average to 34.8 
per cent, in the decade 1840-50. In the next twenty years the 
bad times preceding the civil war, and the war itself, reduced 
immigration; but the huge commercial expansion that set in 
after the war, attracting new racial elements, — Italians, Poles, 
Slavs, Jews, Armenians, Greeks and Syrians, — accelerated 
greatly the population increase from 1870 to 1900. 

Without the alien the farmer in Massachusetts to-day could 
not plant or harvest his crops. In the last available statistics, 
for the year 1908, of 57,303 alien immigrants who made Massa- 
chusetts their destination, 30,610 were farmers, farm laborers, 
ordinary laborers and servants. 

Too many of these aliens have remained in the cities, but 
the great bulk have been distributed, and are to-day doing the 
work on farms and the construction work requiring hard manual 
labor, which, if they had not come, could not be done. If the 
aliens arriving in Boston during the last ten years, who ex- 
pressed themselves as destined for that city, had actually re- 
mained there, Boston would have at least 200,000 more popu- 
lation in 1910 than the census now under way will probably 
find. Alien labor is fluid; it flows where it is needed in the 
State and out of it, and when it is not needed, out of the 
country. A chart of the movement of immigration into the 
United States by years since 1840 would show the industrial 
condition of the country during that time. Good times have 
meant large immigration; bad times, decrease in alien arrivals, 
according to the severity of the panic or business depression; 
the only difference being that while it took two or three years 
for the panic of 1873 to become known in Europe, it took only 
one year in 1893 and one month in 1907, by reason of improved 
facilities in Europe for dissemination of news. The next year 
after the panic of 1907 many more aliens went back to Europe 
than came in, the net result being that for the first time in our 
history since the civil war the human tide across the Atlantic 
was eastward and not westward. 

In addition to the drift from the cities, the farms have to 
contend with the glamor of the west, whose farms are believed 



494 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

to yield prodigal harvests to normal exertion. " The greenest 
fields and most fertile valleys are always on the other side of 
the mountain." It is only recently that an effort has been 
made, with promising results, to show that Massachusetts has 
fertile lands available and unworked, which, considering the 
cost of the land and the nearness of the best market in the 
world, can be made profitable. 

It is folly to think of sending the lifelong city worker to the 
farm; in the great majority of cases he would be unhappy and 
unsuccessful. The fact that thousands of deserted farms all 
over New England are being taken up by immigrants indicates 
that a partial solution of this problem may be found in intelli- 
gent State action, to encourage this movement of aliens to the 
land. More important is the development of education, which 
will teach the native and the second and third generations of 
alien stock, that there is more profit and pleasure in raising 
potatoes and corn than in sweeping streets or doing common 
labor. By showing the coming generation how to brighten their 
lives when they get back to the land, something may be accom- 
plished. It is useless, however, to attempt to get the factory 
worker away from his bench, to compete with Polish farm 
labor under conditions as they exist to-day. 

B. STANDARD OF LIVING. 

The general advance of the standard of living throughout all 
the ranks of the population, from the highest to the lowest, is 
manifestly one of the most potent causes of the increase of the 
demand for commodities, and consequently of the advance of 
prices. On every side the wants of the people have been 
multiplied and diversified. They demand more and better 
things. Their requirements are larger, more varied and more 
exacting. The growth of the cities, the cult of fashion, the 
increase of leisure and numberless factors have combined to 
bring about this advance of living standards. In itself, the 
improvement of the standard of living is a sign of cultural 
progress, to be welcomed and encouraged. Rational extension 
and diversification of consumption is highly desirable. When, 
however, the change proceeds so rapidly as during the last dec- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 495 

ade, it accelerates greatly the upward movement of prices. 
The resulting increase of the cost of living is likely under these 
circumstances to produce a reactionary effect on the standard 
of living, causing the consumers to curtail expenditures, and 
thus to abandon the gains that have been briefly won. In short, 
the advance of the standard of living, if not rationally guided 
and safeguarded, threatens to bring about a later decline of the 
standard to a lower level. 

The various factors entering into the advance of the standard 
of living have been admirably analyzed by Marcus M. Marks. 
He points out the extension of the consumer's requirements 
with reference to the five necessities of civilized existence, — 
food, shelter, clothing, education and society, — as follows: — 

1. Food. — Finer and more varied food than heretofore is now gen- 
erally demanded by the workingman, on account of an educated taste, 
and also, perhaps, because of the more general publicity as to what 
is consumed by the other classes. The result is an increased demand, 
which advances prices. 

2. Shelter. — The standards of home conditions as to sanitation, light, 
air and comfort have steadily advanced, until, as a result, more, larger 
and costlier buildings are required to house the same number of people, 
with a corresponding increase in rent. This creates a larger demand 
for building materials and labor. 

3. Clothing. — In former days garments were often worn until the 
color changed and the cloth became threadbare; nowadays the work- 
ingman discards clothing long before these conditions appear. Style 
has become more imperious and fashions more fickle. As is the case 
in the improvement of homes, so, naturally, the larger demand for 
clothing vastly increases the demand for materials and labor. The 
resulting scarcity of wool, for example, has greatly advanced its 
market price. 

4. Education. — The present broader and more general education, 
even though free from direct expense to the workingman, adds to his 
cost of living by refining, his tastes and increasing his desires. For 
example, the purchase of a morning paper is now his regular habit; 
an evening paper almost equally so; popular books and magazines are 
included in the necessities of life; furthermore, life insurance premiums 
and many other expenses incident to present-day enlightenment are 
added to the cost of the workingman's living. 

5. Society. — Finally, the desire for social intercourse, greater in this 
day of general co-operation and interdependence than ever before, 
again adds to the list of necessary expenses; there are many outlays 
incident to going about and mingling with one's fellows which need 



496 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

not be here detailed, but must be added to the cost of what is now 
included in true living. 

The growth of leisure, in the form of holidays and vacations, 
is a notable feature of the advance of the standard of living. 
Before the civil war few save the wealthy ever thought of taking 
a vacation regularly each year ; now it is the common practice. 
The result is undoubtedly beneficial to those who thus get fresh 
energy, and without it many more workers would break down 
under the strain of modern competitive conditions. At the 
same time, it must be realized that vacations mean expense, 
even if in the long run the common welfare gains. Machinery 
makes money while it runs, loses money while it is idle. In- 
terest never rests. All fixed charges are continuous. Some of 
the loss is offset by better work after recreation, but some of it 
is permanent. 

Wise though the outlay for vacations may be, it makes what 
at any rate on the surface is a material addition to the cost of 
living. Besides the cessation of income that a vacation ordi- 
narily means, it commonly entails extra expense for fares, 
board or the like. If a third of our people now average to 
take a vacation of two weeks, this extra expense probably 
amounts to $20,000,000 or $30,000,000 a year. The recent 
census of the resort property of Maine shows that it has 5,100 
summer cottages owned outside the State, of which probably 
more than half are owned by residents of Massachusetts. These 
5,100 cottages represent an investment for buildings, land 
and furnishings of more than $15,000,000. Besides, there are 
in Maine 620 summer hotels, largely patronized by Massa- 
chusetts people. Doubtless there are as many more summer 
cottages owned by our people in our own State, New Hamp- 
shire, or Vermont. All this means expenditure that the last 
generation did not incur. 

The passenger receipts of the Boston & Maine, Boston & 
Albany and New York, New Haven & Hartford railroads last 
year amounted, in January, February and March, to $8,690- 
737.23; in July, August and September, to $13,122,030.54, — 
a difference of $4,431,293.31. Probably what Massachusetts 
travelers paid to other railroads much more than offset what 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 497 

was paid by residents of other States to these three ; and taking 
into account steamboat receipts, it is reasonable to say that for 
the fares of summer travel of the vacation, holiday or pleasure 
variety our people paid out last year at least $5,000,000. 

Though we have not markedly increased the number of our 
holidays, the growth of manufacturing has made them more 
expensive. We now have eight legal holidays in the year, and 
two or three other days partly or locally observed. We are 
turning out goods to the value of more than $4,000,000 on each 
working day of the year. It is manifest that every addition 
to the list of holidays will mean no immaterial lessening of our 
product, with a proportionate increase in the cost and so much 
of economic loss to the community. Therefore, when new pro- 
posals for more holidays are made, laudable as their purpose 
may be, their advantage must be weighed against the loss they 
are sure to entail. Thus far the mass of our people seem not 
to have learned how to make the most profitable use of isolated 
holidays. Three of them come at a season when the weather is 
likely to be inclement, so that outdoor merrymaking is pre- 
cluded, and no adequate provision is made for healthful amuse- 
ment indoors. Too often the holiday means more work for the 
police. 

From the economic point of view, it might be wise to en- 
courage the extension of the Saturday half-holiday, especially 
in the heated term. Already it has become general in the com- 
mercial field. Its more common use in the industries would 
make July and August more endurable to thousands. But even 
this means a temporary addition to the cost of living when- 
ever machinery must be idle. 

It is worthy of note that the rise of the standard of living 
is not a phenomenon peculiar to this country; the same change 
is taking place in other parts of the world. In Germany the 
advance of the requirements of the population as regards hous- 
ing, clothing and all forms of consumption is most notable. 
Consul-General Robert E. Skinner comments upon this fact, in 
a report of March 14, of this year, as follows : — 

Germany has long since ceased to be an inexpensive country, popular 
opinion to the contrary notwithstanding. The steady advance of the 



498 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

cost of living ... is explained not only by the phenomena which 
accompany the enormous increase in the world's production of gold, 
but by profound changes which are taking place — which have already 
taken place — in the social fabric of the German people. Rapidly 
accumulated fortunes and increasing national wealth have created new 
standards and new requirements. Shorter hours of labor, higher wages, 
old age and accident insurance, abundant tables, better homes, — these 
are among the contributing causes of the higher cost of living, not 
merely as respects commodities, but as respects total per capita ex- 
penditures. The abundant population of Germany no longer emigrates 
to any extent, but those who once emigrated and have returned, and 
those whose relatives have written home in regard to their prosperity 
and comfort abroad, especially in the United States, have become in- 
sistent upon an amelioration in living conditions here. Old and 
crowded quarters in ancient cities have been destroyed, and in some 
cities large real-estate speculations have been undertaken at municipal 
expense, to provide new suburbs embodying the most admirable hygienic 
principles. 

C. EXTRAVAGANCE. 

One of the great factors leading up to the rise in prices, 
which must be given its due importance, is extravagance and 
its collateral evil of waste. Extravagance in its true economic 
meaning is an expenditure beyond one's means. 

In all ages of the world social standards have been set from 
above; and so long as those whose wealth or social prominence 
forces the newspapers to make them objects of public notice 
continue to wallow in their wealth, salaried persons, from the 
highest to the lowest, down to wage earners, follow the bad 
example. Extravagance is, after all, comparative. The busi- 
ness man with an income of $10,000 a year can safely set a 
standard of living that would be ruinous to a shopkeeper at 
$2,000 a year; and imitation of the tradesman with $2,000 a 
year by the shoemaker at $15 a week would be equally ruinous. 
If increased brains, energy and enterprise did not result in en- 
abling persons to indulge in reasonable luxuries, there would be 
no incentive to progress. The danger comes when the general 
tendency is toward spending beyond one's income, which is 
apparent to-day. 

When to Vitellius was given by his brother a banquet, at 
which were served 2,000 dishes of fish and 7,000 of birds, each 
being the rarest to be found in the world, with other courses to 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 499 

correspond, and when the emperor himself, to show his gener- 
osity, spent on his table in four months an amount estimated 
at $35,000,000 in our money, no doubt people of that day as- 
serted that it was good for trade, and kept money in circulation, 
ignorant of the fact that rapid circulation of money is merely 
an index of activity only, and may or may not be an indication 
of wealth. The declaration that extravagance breeds prosperity 
is a bait for the thoughtless, invented by kings and spendthrifts, 
to excuse their indulgence. 

Time has demonstrated that using the wealth of a nation 
or the world in taking people away from useful pursuits to 
purposes of luxury and extravagance spells national suicide, 
and that those nations which have attempted this in the past 
have ended in disaster. 

Our crude necessities of life are food, clothing and shelter. 
As we multiply these three essentials, we grow in civilization; 
our tastes grow more exacting. We develop artificial wants 
by gratification, and these grow into necessities. Up to a 
certain point this is good. The common laborer of to-day is 
better housed, fed and clothed, and insists on and receives more 
comforts and luxuries than the Norman kings who ruled Eng- 
land in the twelfth century. The wage earner of to-day lives 
under conditions that would have been deemed luxurious by a 
rich Englishman of the fifteenth century ; and a tenement built 
in conformity to recent legislation is superior to the houses 
in which men of means lived in colonial days. No humane man 
or woman desires, or would countenance, any movement to 
reduce the standard of living or take away from the wage 
earner the right to live decently and properly, to house, clothe, 
educate and amuse his family. It is only when foolish expendi- 
ture endangers the life of the nation that the line must be 
drawn. 

The remedy is not in going to the other extreme. The miser, 
who buries his gold, to this extent impedes commercial progress 
by taking it out of circulation, where it moves and works, giving 
employment to labor and doing good to all. If everybody with 
money were miserly, and kept it in hiding, labor would soon be 
idle and hungry. 

While the commission is unanimous in its belief that one of 



500 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

the causes of the present situation is the universal evil of 
spending too much, it realizes that saying so will do little good. 
Spending money is one of the things, like picking out a hus- 
band or a wife, on which few human beings are willing to 
accept any verdict except their own. It is true that we have 
great extravagances in this country ; we also have great wealth, 
but we cannot retain both. The remedy, when it comes, must 
begin at the top. Governments, national, State and municipal, 
should and must set the good example which may be followed 
with wisdom by the wealthy. The wage earners, who were the 
last to enter this mad contest of spending, will be the first to 
give it up, because on them its heaviest burdens fall. 



1910.1 HOUSE — No. 1750. 501 



X. 

CHANGES IN VALUE OF MONEY. 



A. THE THEORY OF MONEY AND PRICES. 

The fundamental reason for the world-wide increase of prices 
is, in our belief, the increased production of gold. We share 
this belief with nearly all the economists. Ke-examination of 
the standard literature on the subject, reconsideration of the 
theories of money, study of recent writings and critical scrutiny 
of the financial situation unite to strengthen the conviction that 
gold is at the bottom of the increased cost of living. 

In reaching this conclusion we accept, with qualifications, 
what is called " the quantitative theory of money." Books, 
essays, writings innumerable have been devoted to the discus- 
sion of this theory. Nine out of ten economists now accept it ; 
the tenth denies it, and then admits all its essentials, going on 
to dispute over application and detail. 

Let us state this theory simply. 

Money is the measure of value and medium of exchange. 

Price is the ratio at which a commodity will exchange for 
money. 

A general rise in prices is a fall in money. They are two 
names for the same thing. 

Consequently, the value of money, other things being equal, 
varies inversely as its quantity. 

Two economic laws operate on money at the same time : first, 
the supply tends to meet the demand ; and second, the value in 
exchange is the cost of producing that part secured with the 
most labor. 

There is no real difficulty in reconciling these things, though 
their relation has caused much of the misconception. Theoreti- 
cally, effort will be put into the mining of gold until the 



502 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

increase of the output so swells the supply as fully to meet the 
demand for it at the price measuring their relative proportions. 
At that moment the most costly ounce of gold brought to the 
mint will have required effort equal to that exerted in producing 
the goods for which it will exchange. So, in the long run, other 
things being equal, an ounce of gold will exchange for as much 
of every other commodity as can be produced or imported at 
the same cost with itself, and at the same time will conform to 
the law of supply and demand. 

Economic laws do not work with precision. They are really 
not laws, but rather are statements of tendencies. When cir- 
cumstances permit, they describe facts. Alfred Marshall, the 
learned English economist, put the matter excellently When he 
said to the Indian Currency Committee of 1898: — 

This so-called " quantitative theory of the value of money " is true 
in just the same way as it is true that the day's temperature varies 
with the length of the day, other things being equal; but other things 
are seldom equal. This theory has been the cause of much contro- 
versy; but it has never been seriously denied by any one who has taken 
it as a whole, and has not stopped short, omitting the words " other 
things being equal." 

The " other things " modify the effect of the principle, but 
it still is underneath the whole price problem. Prof. William 
Graham Sumner of Yale, the eminent authority who has just 
died, wrote a few months ago the most succinct statement of 
the case that we have seen, as follows : — 

The increased production of gold and the increase of currency are 
the only things known to me which would cause a general rise of prices. 

It is to be noted that Professor Sumner coupled increase of 
currency with increase of gold. Therein lies one of the issues 
most debated. As usual, the quarrel centers about a definition. 
Perhaps the clearest thinking will follow the use of the late 
President Francis A. Walker's definition : " That which does 
the money-work is the money-thing." Most economists to-day, 
however, take his definition of money in its broadest sense, 
and believe that the evidences of credit play as much of a part 
in determining prices as do the precious metals. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 503 

See how the process works. Suppose the mint coins a million 
dollars worth of bullion fresh from a mine. The mining com- 
pany puts the coin in its bank and distributes a corresponding 
amount of dividend checks throughout the country. The stock- 
holders deposit their checks in various banks, which in due 
course collect them, perhaps in the form of gold certificates. 
Then those banks have that much more money to lend, and 
lending is their business. They are supposed to add a quarter 
of their new resources to their reserve; keep it in their vaults. 
They lend the other three-quarters by crediting borrowers with 
it on the books. The borrowers draw checks against the credit, 
and it becomes efficient as new money, for it does the work of 
money. By so much has the money supply of the country been 
expanded, — that is, by at least four times the amount of gold 
mined. 

So it is that, other things being equal, bank reserves tend 
to increase or decrease along with the increase or decrease of the 
gold supply. The circulation of checks rests upon the bank 
reserves for its support, and so will go up or down with the 
reserves. There must be always a money basis for credit, and 
the larger the basis the larger the credit structure possible. Fur- 
thermore, the more complex the credit system the less metallic 
money, relatively, is needed for its support, and the greater the 
volume of payments made with a given supply. 

Prof. A. Piatt Andrew, now Director of the Mint, stated 
it thus, in the precise language of the economist : — 

In the long run, as apart from the cyclic oscillations, the quantity 
of banking credit is governed by the quantity of money, and each 
permanent addition to the monetary supply tends in the end toward 
an increase of credit. We are thus brought back to the traditional 
theorem that the value of money in the long run depends most im- 
portantly upon its quantity. Its quantity affects prices not alone 
when money enters the circulation, but also when money is gathered 
in the bank reserves, because the amount of the only kind of credit 
which serves effectively as a substitute for money depends primarily 
upon the extent of these reserves. 

It is also to be remembered that the influence of credit in 
raising prices is cumulative. If the desire to buy is turned 
into a capacity by converting credit into bank checks, and thus 



504 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

the new demand raises prices, the owner of the goods sought 
can in turn get larger credit at his bank, since he borrows on 
the new valuation. If confidence prevails and business is good, 
this process may repeat itself until prices are forced to a dan- 
gerously high level ; for an artificial foundation is under it all, 
and when panic comes, the structure topples. In time of crisis 
money is hoarded, especially in rural communities. In the 
panic of 1907 it was extensively hoarded everywhere. At such 
a period the value of money rises, and for the moment prices 
drop. 

Critics of the theory do not destroy it when they insist on 
change of emphasis on its details. For example, the " London 
Statist " has recently thought to overcome it again by laying 
the great stress on credit. It says : — 

What really does determine prices is credit. Prices rise when there 
is an eagerness to buy; prices fall when there is an unwillingness to 
buy; in other words, when credit is good, prices are high; when credit 
is bad, prices are low. Credit, in its turn, is determined partly by the 
general feeling of the times and partly by the ability or inability of 
the banks to lend freely. 

Then the " Statist" goes on to explain that when the gold 
production is increasing it is in the power of the banker to add 
to his reserve, and therefore to augment very considerably the 
accommodation he gives to his customer. So, after all, the 
increase in gold must have come into play. 

That prices rise unequally shows no flaw in the argument. 
A thousand other influences are at work at the same time. For 
instance, meat products lead in the rise because of the scarcity 
of food animals. Those things quickly consumed, like all food 
supplies, feel the inflow of new money first; those slowly re- 
placed, such as jewelry and ornaments, are likely to feel it 
last. Eents of old houses would change slowly, for the owner 
expects to get the customary return until they are worn out. 
Rents of new houses, however, would be set at a higher figure 
than if the money stock had not increased, for the owner has 
but just laid out more in building than would otherwise have 
been needed. 

Furthermore, any general rise in prices has varying effects 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 505 

on different commodities. In one case an attempted increase 
of 5 per cent, in price might reduce demand by 5 per cent. ; in 
another field it might reduce demand but 1 per cent. New and 
different prices follow the adjustment of supply to demand. 
Men would pay almost any price for flour. They might almost 
wholly refuse to buy grape fruit, if its price doubled. 

Such, indeed, is the constant flux of society that, even if there 
were no changes in the value of gold, prices would change; 
some would go down and others would go up. The demand 
alters with every whim of fashion, with the devising of substi- 
tutes, with the movements of population, with a thousand other 
happenings. So relative prices are always changing. 

It is no refutation of the argument that the general level of 
prices changes faster in one country than in another. A country 
like the United States may enormously expand its banking 
facilities, and so spread the chance for credit; while another, 
like Austria, may expand them little. One country may have 
the hoarding habit, and another may hoard little. The Orient 
puts vastly more of the gold it receives into ornaments than the 
Occident thus uses. Furthermore, price movements are to 
some extent psychological. The mercurial temperament of a 
nation may lead it to exaggerate a movement in prices. In such 
a country the threat of more money may produce the actual 
effect of more money; the future may be discounted. 

It is urged that annual additions to the world's stock of gold 
can have slight effect on prices, because they are so small in 
comparison with the whole stock, and year by year increase that 
stock so slightly. But the fact is that this stock has been almost 
exactly doubled in the last thirty years ; more than one quarter 
of its present total has been added in the last ten years. 

It is perfectly true that relatively small additions to the stock 
of gold might have no visible effect whatever on prices. These 
additions might be no more than would be necessary to meet 
the demands of a growing population or a growing commerce. 
They might be absorbed by regions hitherto insufficiently sup- 
plied with a medium of exchange, thus lessening barter. They 
might be added to hoards, or they might be used in the arts. 

When the snows melt at the source of a river flowing through 
arid plains, its dry banks may so drink the flood that the people 



506 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

below will say the melting of the snow does not raise the river. 
But in some exceptional season the volume of water may sur- 
pass the saturating capacity of the plains, and then a disastrous 
flood may prove, after all, that melting snows create flowing 
water. So it may be that the thirst of commerce and industry 
will absorb ordinary increases in gold production, even to a sur- 
prising point, and yet at last be sated. That which hitherto 
refreshed may now drown. 

The quantitative theory in its simplest form, unqualified, 
has caused error and is not now generally accepted ; that is to 
say, it is not now urged by the clearest thinkers that a change 
in the volume of money is alone enough to explain a change in 
prices. It is but one of three factors at work. Another is that 
of the speed with which money works, — technically known as 
its velocity of circulation, — for clearly the more rapidly it 
changes hands the less of it is needed. The third factor is that 
of the work to be done, — the volume of business. 

Any one of these factors may change independently of the 
others; any two may change while the third is constant; all 
three may be changing at the same time. Exceedingly complex 
forces are always at work on at least two of them. Of the third, 
the velocity of circulation, we as yet know little and can speak 
with no confidence ; but, though it probably changes more slowly 
than the others, it doubtless varies from period to period and 
surely differs from place to place. To dispose of it first, it may 
be said that not until recently has there been any attempt to 
measure it. Dr. E. W. Kemmerer, in a monograph published 
three years ago, figured out 31 as the rate of monetary turnover 
each year for the total amount of money in circulation in this 
country, and 47 as the rate for the amount in circulation, ex- 
clusive of bank reserves. Several years earlier Prof. Irving 
Fisher had estimated " an average velocity of 45 times a year, 
making the average length of time a dollar rests in one man's 
hands about eight days." But in the " Journal of the Royal 
Statistical Society " of September, 1909, he reported that his 
calculations showed a velocity in 1896 of a little more than 
18 times a year. Similar calculations following out the same 
method, but applied to statistics of 1909, made by Prof. David 
Kinley of the University of Illinois, show the same results. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 507 

Fisher thinks that this agreement between velocity in 1896 
and 1909 would seem to indicate that the velocity of circu- 
lation of money does not fluctuate greatly; and he says that 
some French and a few American statistics for the velocity 
of circulation of deposit currency against which checks are 
drawn afford no evidence that the velocity of circulation of 
bank deposits has materially changed. On the other hand, 
Prof. W. C. Clark of the College of the City of New York 
avers that the rapidity of circulation of given exchange means 
is steadily increasing, owing to bettering means of transit, of 
communication and of accountancy. Such conflicting views 
serve to show both the importance of the inquiry and the need 
of its pursuit to agreement before the currency problem will 
be solved. 

The volume of business is a factor almost as hard to measure. 
Yet by combining current statistics from various fields of enter- 
prise, what are called " barometers " of business are prepared, 
and it is easy to get from them a general idea of the tides of 
industry and commerce. Casual examination of the charts is 
enough to show that the ebb and flow of these tides cannot alone 
account for the movements of prices. 

Prof. J. Laurence Laughlin of the University of Chicago, 
who objects to the quantitative theory while seeming at least to 
admit its fundamentals, thinks that " violent and rapid changes 
of price must, in the very nature of the existing demand and 
supply of gold, be attributed to causes working on goods and 
not on gold." Yet it is hard to reconcile the records with the 
belief that the ups and downs of business, viewed in the aggre- 
gate, are of more than secondary importance in their effect on 
general prices, though undoubtedly of serious temporary in- 
fluence. 

If that be so, we must look to the third factor, the volume 
of money, for the chief cause of world-wide changes in general 
prices. What, then, have been the facts about the supply of 
monev ? 



508 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



B. GOLD PRODUCTION. 

It is estimated that in A. D. 14 the visible supply of precious 
metals, including both gold and silver, amounted to $1,750- 
000,000. By 1492, the year of the discovery of America, this 
is believed to have dropped to $170,000,000. The world now 
produces that much of gold alone in less than five months, and 
in computations it is generally ignored. We estimate that 
since 1492 gold has been produced to the value of $13,500,- 
000,000, and that it has gone as follows : — 

In circulation, $8,000,000,000 

Used in the arts, 3,000,000,000 

Sunk in the Orient, 1,450,000,000 

Hoarded, 1,000,000,000 

Lost by fire, by abrasion, at sea, etc., . . . . 50,000,000 

Total, $13,500,000,000 






The annual production of gold up to the middle of the last 
century was inconsiderable, judged by present standards. With 
the discoveries in California and Australia it jumped from 
$13,484,000 in the decade 1831-40 to $36,393,000 in the dec- 
ade 1841-50, and then to $133,298,100 in the next decade. 
From 1861 to 1890 the average by decades fell off somewhat, 
but since then has been increasing most significantly. The 
average production by five-year periods since 1880 has been: — 



Yeak. 


Average 
Annual 
Product. 


Increase 

by 
Periods. 


Year. 


Average 
Annual 
Product. 


Increase 

by 
Periods. 


1881-85, . 
1886-90, . 
1891-95, . 


899,116,000 
112,895,000 
162,947,000 


§13,779,000 
50,052,000 


1896-1900, . 
1901-05, . 
1906-09, . 


1257,301,100 
322,619,820 
428,656,275 


$94,354,100 
65,318,720 
106,036,455 



But for the effects of the Boer war, probably $200,000,000 
more would have been produced in Africa in the period 1901- 
05, and the rate of annual increase for the world would have 
been about the same as in the 1896-1900 and 1906-09 periods. 

At the rate of increase which has prevailed for the last five 
years, averaging in round numbers $22,000,000 a year, the 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 509 

total production will be $480,000,000 in 1910, and $502,- 
000,000 in 1911. 

The world is now producing in every five days as much gold 
as was produced in the average year of the seventeenth century ; 
in every ten days as much as in the average year of the eigh- 
teenth century. In the last thirty years it has produced as 
much as was produced in the preceding four centuries. In 
other words, the stock has doubled in thirty years. The stock 
on hand fifteen years ago has been increased by one-half since 
then. We are now adding to the stock at the rate of S 1 ^ per 
cent, a year. 

The great increase has been due to the application of new 
processes. After the discoveries in California and Australia, 
the primitive methods of placer mining were supplemented first 
by sluicing and hydraulic mining, to which was added about 
twenty years ago the use of dredges or excavators. These expe- 
dients did not reach the " free gold " to be found in veins or 
reefs of quartz or other hard substances, and to these was ap- 
plied the amalgam process, by which ores crushed in stamp 
mills yield up gold that will form an amalgamate with mercury. 
Still more important in its results was the application of chem- 
ical processes to the treatment of ores called " refractory," con- 
taining certain elements that prevent the gold from amalgamat- 
ing with mercury. These are known as the chlorination and 
cyanide processes, and it is said they are responsible for some- 
thing more than one-half of the present output of gold and more 
than three-quarters of the profits now obtained from gold 
mining. 

It is clear that there has been enormous increase in produc- 
tion, but there is a wide difference of opinion as to how much 
its cost has actually been reduced. Professor Laughlin, who 
criticises the quantitative theory in its unqualified form, wrote, 
in 1902 : — 

That gold itself has fallen in cost can be seen by the fact that the 
effort of ordinary unskilled labor commands more gold now than at 
any other time in the history of the world. 

Of course this is more evident to-day. 

On the other hand, W. E. Ingalls, the editor of the " En- 



510 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

gineering and Mining Journal/' who speaks with an authority 
that is to be respected, and who fails to find correspondence 
between the course of prices and that of gold production, 



It is true that working costs have been greatly reduced during the last 
ten years, which has enabled the utilization of lower and lower grades 
of ore, but it is doubtful if the net profit per ton of ore has been 
increased. On the contrary, it probably has decreased. 

This may be true, and yet the argument may be inconclusive. 
Before the development of metallurgical science those who made 
profit in gold mining often made huge profit. Their gains, 
however, were so much more than offset by the losses of the 
unsuccessful that in the aggregate the industry was perhaps 
the least profitable of all great industries. It may be that the 
new methods have turned the scale, and that, though the per- 
centage of mining enterprises making great gains is smaller 
than of old, the percentage making smaller gains is far larger. 
There may be less profit per ton and greater total profit. How- 
ever that may be, the clear fact is that the production grows 
enormously, regardless of the distribution of profits or their 
amount. 

Mr. Ingalls draws the conclusion that in the last fifty years 
there has been no cheapening of an ounce of gold. At the same 
time he admits that the dividends on the capital invested in the 
Transvaal gold mines, far and away the most important mining 
district in the world, putting out a third of the world's product, 
have increased from 23.1 per cent, in the five years before the 
Boer war to 24.9 per cent, in the five years following it; but 
this he explains with the suggestion that a large part of mining 
dividends is simply return of capital invested, and that the 
increase in the dividends paid by the Rand has doubtless been 
to a large extent the result of the investment of great sums 
sent out by England and France. When, however, he says 
that " the steady increase in the production of gold is in itself 
evidence that mining for it is now carried on as an industry, 
and, as in the case of most industries, at a small margin of 
profit on the whole," he nullifies the force of conclusions based 
on dividends, whether taken as they appear or modified by 
explanation. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 511 

It is true that gold mining is an industry in all essential 
respects like all other industries. Its output tends to increase 
when the value of the product is rising, and to decline when 
the value of the product is falling. But this tendency will 
not be of consequence until the profits of the industry fall 
to the level of those of other industries. What the comparative 
profits of gold mining are to-day is largely guesswork. One 
writer estimates that the net profits of producing gold in most 
of the world's important gold mines are now from two to five 
times those of producing most other commodities. This of 
course eliminates the gambling factor that causes most of the 
losses in the occupation, and means that as an industry gold 
production is from two to £.Ye times more profitable to-day 
than other industries. 

J. R. Finlay, general manager of the Goldfield Consolidated 
Mines Company, writes to the commission that he believes 
that gold mining is at present more profitable than the mining 
of any other metal. He says : — 

This is especially the ease outside of the United States, which is not 
particularly prominent in this industry. There is, however, another 
side to the question; namely, that the companion metal of gold, silver, 
is diminishing proportionately in value, and it is doubtful whether 
the production of gold has been cheapened more than that of other 
great staples. 

As showing the change the chemical processes have made, 
Mr. Uinlay writes : — 

As a further example, I may cite the experience of this mine. 
Under the conditions of twenty years ago, even if adequate transporta- 
tion facilities were afforded, the cost of shipping our ores to the 
smelters would be approximately $30 a ton, and there would not be 
much profit in mining ore less than $40 a ton. At present ores can 
be mined here without loss for $6 a ton, and this company is earning 
in round numbers $700,000 a month on ores averaging somewhat less 
than $40. Other large districts that are similarly dependent upon 
these improvements are El Oro, Mex., Cripple Creek, Col., Kalgoorlie, 
West Australia, and the Thames district in New Zealand. 

Much of the gold product is now a by-product in the produc- 
tion of other metals, especially copper. Copper production is 



512 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

increasing rapidly, and so its by-product, gold, will continue to 
increase. 

It has been published that the average to the ton in the mines 
of the Rand, South Africa, last year was about $7, and that 
it has been declining about 50 cents a ton for five years, show- 
ing that lower and lower grades of ore have been profitably 
worked. It is not, however, likely that improvement of the 
processes will result in securing a much larger percentage of 
the gold in the ore, for John Hays Hammond, the eminent min- 
ing expert, tells a member of the commission that already from 
90 to 92 per cent, is secured, so that the rest is almost a negli- 
gible quantity. Mr. Hammond says the mines of the Eand will 
produce $175,000,000 this year. He thinks that this will in- 
crease for a few years, then gradually decrease for a few more 
years, and after that sharply decline, by reason of the gradually 
increasing depth of the workings. 

There may, of course, be changes in the mechanical costs of 
production, in those of labor and materials, but they cannot be 
foretold. One certain thing, however, is that the known ores 
available for chemical treatment are so enormous in extent that 
no speedy diminution of the output of gold is expected. Mr. 
Hammond thinks the increase will continue for at least a dec- 
ade. Another expert, A. Selwyn-Brown, says : — 

The annual output of the world will continue steadily to increase. 
A progressive increase each year may confidently be expected. 

Because throughout the history of the world there have been 
fluctuations in gold production, some critics aver that it is 
impossible to make reasonable forecasts, and say that if prophecy 
is to be attempted at all, the probability is that recent increase 
will be followed by speedy decrease. This attitude, however, 
does not take into account the radical change in conditions. 
Formerly increases in production were always due to discover- 
ies of deposits. They are still an important factor, but it is to 
be remembered that of greater importance is the modern appli- 
cation of chemical and mechanical inventions. The science of 
metallurgy has vastly changed the situation. 

Whether still more bonanzas are to be disclosed is of course 
wholly conjectural, though by the doctrine of probabilities they 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



513 



may be expected. The gold supply of the world is virtually 
inexhaustible. Almost all volcanic rocks contain gold. Experi- 
ments have shown that it is regularly falling to the earth, in 
association with cosmic dust. The waters of the sea are aurif- 
erous. There are submarine gold fields, shedding gold that is 
concentrated by the sea and washed ashore, making deposits 
that are enriched or renewed by almost every storm that passes 
over them, such as the gold-bearing beaches at Nome, which 
richly repay working. There are immense deposits of aurif- 
erous sands and clays. Vast areas on every continent are yet 
to be worked. ~No man can foretell the result. 

C. THE GROWTH OF CREDIT. 

As gold is the basis of credit, it was to be expected that the 
increase in the output of gold would be accompanied by an 
increase in the output of credit. Such has been the case. 

Assuming money to be that which does money-work, the 
following table will show its growth in the United States in the 
last thirty years : — 



Per Capita Circulation of Money. 



1879. 



1889. 



1899. 



1909. 



Gold coin and bullion, . 
Silver coin and bullion, 
Total metallic, 

Coin and paper circulation, 
Bank clearings, 
National bank reserves, 
Domestic money orders, 
International money orders, 



$5.02 
2.40 



$7.42 

$16.75 
769.00 

1.80 
.05 



$11.09 
6.86 



$17.95 

$22.52 

873.00 

75.00 

1.88 

.20 



$12.64 
8.40 



$21.04 

$25.58 

,195.00 

120.00 

2.84 

.18 



$18.45 
8.16 



$26.61 

$34.93 

1,790.00 

153.00 

5.79 
.86 



In 1879 there were 2,055 national banks; in 1889, 3,158; 
in 1899, 3,590; in 1909, 6,889. Furthermore, 11,319 State 
banks and 1,079 trust companies reported to the Comptroller 
of the Currency in 1909, and 4,325 private banks were listed 
in directories, the greater part of which have been established 
within a generation. 



514 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

The State banks and trust companies had in 1879 deposits 
of $242,831,448; in 1909, $5,302,793,845. 

The loans of national banks doubled in a decade, going from 
$2,516,000,000 in 1899 to $5,128,000,000 in 1909. 

It is to be noticed that the coin and paper circulation per 
capita doubled in thirty years ; that it increased in the last ten 
years by two-fifths, 40 per cent. 1 

To this is to be added the enormous growth in the use of 
currency substitutes, and particularly checks, which may be 
inferred from the figures of bank clearings. Professor Kinley 
concluded in 1897 that " 75 per cent, is a fair estimate of the 
amount of business transactions of all kinds done with credit 
instruments ; " i.e., checks, drafts, etc. Dr. Kemmerer in 
1906 accepted that figure for working purposes, but thought 
it a " fair maximum " rather than a " sure minimum," as Pro- 
fessor Kinley deemed it. From the figures of 1896 it appeared 
that at that time about half the volume of retail payments was 
made with " private credit currency " — checks, etc. — and 
more than nine-tenths of the wholesale business. Since then the 
volume of retail payments by check must have increased, for 
everybody knows of the growth of personal bank accounts. A 
generation ago banks frowned on checks of less than $5 ; to-day 
they vie to get the small accounts, and handle the small checks 
cheerfully. To a corresponding degree men have lessened the 
carrying of large sums in their wallets, and women have be- 
come accustomed to use the check book for household expenses. 

Gold coin has almost disappeared from daily use to pass 
from hand to hand in the United States. It is still common in 
England and more common on the continent, but everywhere 
redeemable paper is supplanting it. Professor Carver has sug- 
gested that one remedy for the situation might be a return to 
its common use here, renewing the old demand for coin as the 
actual medium of exchange. 

At the same time, a relatively smaller percentage of the 
annual output is called for by the arts and for ornament, so 
rapid has been the increase of the total production. 

1 It is an odd coincidence that the world's stock of gold has also doubled in thirty years, and 
that in the last ten years it has increased by 37 per cent. The population of the world, however, 
has by do means doubled in thirty years, and per capita figures would alter the showing. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 515 

Another phenomenon of the times has been the substitution 
of corporations for partnerships, increasing the volume of 
stocks and bonds that can be used as collateral securities for 
loans, and so tending to increase bank deposits based on these 
loans, and in turn the checks drawn against them. 

Still another development to be noted is that of the trust 
companies, without requirement in many States as to the re- 
serves they shall maintain. Few of them in practice come up 
to the 25 per cent, requirement of the national banks; most of 
them keep reserves of from 10 to 20 per cent. Much of the 
reserve is not actually cash in the vault, but is lent to other 
banking institutions, thence going out again as credit circula- 
tion. The result is a constant growth in the ratio of credit 
currency to the gold on which its total is based. 

If we should accept the quantitative theory of money only 
to the extent of admitting that the increase of money plays 
some part in affecting prices, without trying to appraise its 
influence, all this increase of the use of credit would at least 
suggest that here is one cause for the rise in the prices of com- 
modities. 

D. THE EFFECT OF INTEREST. 

The growth of credit money has another result, not directly 
affecting the prices of commodities, but of great immediate 
importance to the community, and, by increasing one cost of 
production, sure in the long run to affect prices also. It 
raises the rate of interest. 

Prof. Irving Fisher, one of the first to discover the relation 
of interest to prices, said, in 1896 : — 

In short, all the facts go to show that the rate of interest tries to 
adjust itself to the appreciation or depreciation of the monetary stand- 
ard in such a manner as to correct in large measure those gains or 
losses by the contracting parties which would otherwise arise from 
variations in the purchasing power of money. 

Therefore, a long-continued and steady rise in prices adds 
to the rate of interest on loans. It adds, in the long run, just 
enough to make good to lenders the shrinking in the purchasing 
power of their capital. It does not do this at the outset. For 



516 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



a time lenders are losers and borrowers are gamers, but in the 
end interest conforms to the earning power of real capital. So 
it acts as a balance wheel on the value of money as a standard 
for the payment of debts, tending to keep the present worth of 
a debt always about the same, regardless of great changes in 
the value of the principal. 

High interest rates mean low prices for bonds and all other 
long-time obligations drawing fixed rates of interest, dividends 
or income. This is believed to be the explanation of the 
lowering of bond values now in progress, — a matter of great 
consequence to all governments. 

The course of the bonds of the State of Massachusetts has been 
instructive. During the decade issues have been sold as fol- 
lows, omitting a few trivial and exceptional issues : — 



Year. 


Amount. 


Basis (Per 
Cent.). 


Year. 


Amount. 


Basis (Per 
Cent.). 


1900 


$2,200,000 


2.890 


1906 


$3,346,000 


3.350 


1901, .... 


7,041,000 


3.070 


1907, .... 


4,059,500 


3.390 


1902, .... 


5,571,000 


3.050 


1908, .... 


3,349,500 


3.440 


1903, .... 


7,002,000 


3.230 


1909, .... 


2,883,800 


3.190 


1904, .... 


4,515,250 


3.250 


1910, .... 


4,791,000 


3.479 


1905 


2,376,000 


3.240 









All issues previous to January 1, 1906, were taxable; those 
since have been tax-exempt. The taxable bonds are now selling 
on a basis of 3.80; the tax-exempt, 3.50. This would indicate 
that investors attach a value of .3 per cent, to the exemption, 
which should be added to the basis figures beginning with 1906 
in making comparison. This would indicate a rise in interest 
on these unimpeachable securities of almost 1 per cent, since the 
sales of 1900, and a corresponding drop in their selling prices. 

In 1904 the city of New York 3% per cent, bonds were dis- 
tributed to the public at as high as 104. The recent sale of 
$40,000,000 was on a basis of about 4^. This was a decline 
of 24 points, or, say, 25 per cent. Since the first of April 
Governor Hughes has signed a bill permitting the issue of 
$78,000,000 of New York State bonds, to bear 4 per cent, 
interest. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 517 

There is now no high-grade corporation security bearing S 1 ^ 
per cent, interest that can be marketed at par. It is believed 
that the finest grade of railroad obligations, having long series 
of years to run, and with the credit of such corporations as the 
Xew York Central or the Pennsylvania behind them, cannot 
be marketed unless the interest rate is at least 4 x /2 V er cent. 

The loss resulting to bondholders and all other investors in 
obligations, from the decrease of the purchasing power of the 
dollars in which they are to be repaid, has been enormous. 
Prof. J. Pease Norton of Yale estimates that more than a 
thousand million of dollars has been lost to the savings bank 
depositors of the country by the depreciation of gold in the 
last thirteen years. 

E. THE FUTURE OF MONEY AND PRICES. 

The future relations of gold and goods — that is to say, 
prices — will depend in the last analysis on the comparative 
costs of production of gold and goods. 

In 1902 Professor Laughlin wrote, in " The Principles of 
Money " : — 

The general outcome has been a race between the effects of a lowered 
cost of obtaining* gold and a lowered expense of producing goods in 
general, in which the latter has won. Both gold and goods can now 
be obtained by less human effort than ever before, but goods by even 
less, relatively, than gold. 

Even if that were in fact the case in 1902, it is at least 
doubtful whether it is the case in 1910. In any event, the 
value set upon gold by its producers is to-day relatively less 
than that set upon goods, for in the bargain more gold is given 
or less goods are offered. 

Byron W. Holt estimates that if the world's gold supply should 
remain unchanged prices would, because of invention and im- 
provement in the production of goods, decline on an average of 
something like 2 or 2% per cent, a year. The gold supply 
would therefore have to increase about 2^2 per cent, a year to 
maintain the level of prices. We have seen that it is increas- 
ing at the rate of SVo per cent, a year. 



518 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

On the other hand, it may be the case that the commodity 
side of the ratio is not maintaining its former rate of progress. 
The march of invention and mechanical construction from 
1873 to 1900, the discoveries in the arts, the development of 
the sciences, were never before equalled in any like period of 
the world's history. The " industrial revolution " following the 
invention of the steam engine was almost insignificant by 
comparison. Recall, for example, what has resulted from the 
invention of the telephone; the use of electricity as a motive 
power; the standardizing of parts in all mechanical work; the 
development of agricultural implements. Looking back over 
the last decade, has the progress continued ? Does there not 
seem to be a lull in the inventive advance of mankind? In 
aerial navigation alone does phenomenal advance come to mind, 
but here no commercial results have as yet followed. 

The well-known law of diminishing returns tells us that as 
population grows there must be recourse to inferior soils, or 
more effort put into those already tilled. This need may be 
offset by inventions or by otherwise increasing the efficiency of 
labor, and for more than a century that has been the case, so 
that on the average every man born into the world has easily 
produced more than he has cost. But there can be no check 
in this, else the costs of production of goods rise. For the 
reasons set forth in other parts of this report, such as the 
diversion of labor from the production of necessities to that 
of luxuries, or the diminution of its efficiency by one cause or 
another, it may be that the costs of production of goods are 
really losing now in the race with the cost of production of 
gold. Of course, leaving out the factor of new gold discoveries, 
unless metallurgical invention and development keep pace with 
increasing difficulties of gold production, that is, resort to de- 
posits less easily reached, the time will come when the cost of 
production of gold will be greater than that of the commodities 
for which it exchanges at the prices of the moment. Then 
effort will be turned from gold mining to manufacturing or 
agriculture, production of other commodities will increase 
faster than that of gold, and prices will fall. 

Meanwhile, there are sure to be temporary reactions. The 
influence of gold on credit, acting through bank reserves, is one 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 519 

of fluctuation. Additions to the Reserves stimulate credit 
unduly, depression follows, the reserves become excessive, and 
so the pendulum swings back and forth between what we call 
crisis and prosperity, bad times and good times. It is the 
common belief of financiers to-day that the pendulum must 
soon swing back. That means depression, dull trade and a 
drop in prices. But if gold be really behind it all, and if gold 
production continue to increase, with costs less than those of 
goods, prices must rise again, and to higher levels. 

Manifestly, the evils that follow in the train of such a course 
are due to the lack of stability in the standard of measure, — 
gold. Nobody to-day seriously urges making that standard still 
less stable by coupling another metal with it. Everybody 
sees that by refusing bimetallism in 1906 we escaped a still 
worse situation, although the actual scarcity of money then 
furnished excuse for its advocacy. It is the fact that the prob- 
lem of to-day is the very converse of the problem of 1896. 
Then the value of the dollar had been rising; the value of 
goods, prices, and interest rates had been falling. To-day 
the value of the dollar is falling; the value of goods, prices, 
and interest rates are rising. As it would have proved ruinous 
to increase the volume of money then, so it would be futile to 
try to decrease its volume now. 

Xo specific remedy for the situation exists, unless it be 
sought in the direction of a new standard of value. For many 
years the economists have been discussing the possibility of 
that. Many of them urge its creation by the framing of what 
they describe as a " multiple standard." In the simplest form 
its establishment would require that governmental authority 
should determine the price at a given time of a combination 
of a certain amount of each of the staple articles of com- 
merce. This would thereafter be the standard, instead of the 
price of a single article, — gold. Each day the designated 
governmental office would determine by the market quotations 
how much each of the articles making up the composite had 
changed in price, and would announce the aggregate for the 
day; and debts due that day would be paid in accordance 
therewith, if such had been the agreement. 

It is hard to see how anv harm could come from giving 



520 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

official aid to the maintenance of such a standard for the use 
of any borrowers and lenders who chose to adopt it. In the 
event of long continuance of the upward movement of prices, 
its use might prevent serious injustice and great hardship. 
We recommend that our Senators and Representatives in Con- 
gress consider the expediency of advocating its establishment. 



1910.1 HOUSE — No. 1750. 521 



XL 

EFFECTS OF INCREASE OF COST OF LIVING. 



The general rise of prices in recent years has been charac- 
terized by one economist as an unmitigated evil, with no 
compensation whatever. This is an extreme and one-sided 
statement of the situation. The rise of prices has caused 
serious disturbance and inflicted heavy losses. On the other 
hand, however, it has brought various offsetting advantages, 
which must be taken into account in any estimate of the net 
results. 

Regarded from a strictly economic point of view, the ad- 
vance in prices has brought some gains to producers, while it 
has inflicted hardship upon consumers. Rising prices stimu- 
late business. As a rule, the manufacturer gains when prices 
are rising, because he gets more for his products and does not 
have to pay proportionately more for material and labor, 
since the prices of the latter move upward more slowly than 
the prices of finished commodities. The farmer also is a sub- 
stantial gainer, for he buys comparatively little, and thus does 
not lose as a purchaser what he gains as a seller during the 
period of rising prices; the rise increases his surplus of net 
income. The debtor, too, reaps advantages from the rising 
prices, as the depreciating currency makes it easier to pay 
debts. But in the long run, if the depreciation is continu- 
ous and calculable, it is discounted in advance, and interest 
rates are raised proportionately. It must be recognized, how- 
ever, that some classes derive pecuniary benefits from rising 
prices. 

One beneficial result of rising prices is the effect that they 
have in averting prolonged industrial depression. An upward 
tendency of prices helps greatly to tide over a period of 



522 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

slackened business activity. Kising prices serve as a fillip to 
industrial enterprise, and prevent a temporary collapse from 
developing into a confirmed and prolonged depression. This 
stimulating influence made itself felt in 1903 and again in 
1907, contributing powerfully toward the recovery from the 
panics of those years. 

On the other hand, rising prices cause serious economic evils. 
In general, they tend to promote a reckless speculative spirit 
in business circles. This demoralizing influence has been con- 
spicuous during the last decade. Furthermore, rising prices 
inflict hardship upon wage earners and salaried persons. It 
is an economic law that the prices of services rise more slowly 
than do the prices of commodities. Consequently, when prices 
are going up, wages and salaries do not increase to keep pace 
with the advanced cost of living. The workingman has been 
compensated for the loss caused by the advance in prices 
through increase of wages to a greater extent than has the 
salaried person. The members of the latter class have not 
been compensated in this way for the burden of increased 
living expenses to any appreciable extent. Salaries move even 
more sluggishly than wages. Members of this class have there- 
fore suffered most from the recent advance of prices. They 
do not protect themselves through combination, as do members 
of the wage-earning class. 

The clergyman, the physician, the engineer, the editor, the 
teacher, the judge, the public official, are among those upon 
whom the burden of rising prices falls most heavily, who 
least can endure its hardships. They are expected to deport 
themselves according to the social standards set for their posi- 
tion. Petty economies lessen their usefulness; great economies 
may destroy it. So far as the remedy lies within the control 
of individuals, we can of course do no more than urge upon 
congregations, clients and contributors to recognize the opera- 
tion of economic laws, and accept new standards of remunera- 
tion. But in the matter of public servants it is not improper 
for us to suggest that the public honor, as well as the public 
advantage, calls for a liberal and even generous treatment. 
Where salaries have been unduly high, the drop in their goods- 
value may indeed be properly used to the public gain; but 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 523 

unless a given salary was in fact too high on the old scale of 
goods-values, it cannot now be fairly or wisely left untouched 
if it seems clear that there is to be no speedy decline of prices 
to former levels. It is of the greatest importance to the com- 
munity that it shall pay salaries adequate for the attraction of 
competent men from private employment and for their reten- 
tion in the public service. The government should be the model 
employer. That is not real extravagance. The other course 
would be penny-wise and pound-foolish. 

It would not be fair to construe this as a recommendation of 
extravagance. It is meant as a simple recognition of the fact 
that the working of certain economic laws has had the practical 
effect of cutting down the real salaries of all public servants. 
We do not believe the public desires a general and sweeping 
reduction in its pay roll. The times do not call for it. Pros- 
perity is too general for such an assumption. We can afford 
to pay our servants at least as much as we paid them a decade 
ago. If the tax rate rises in consequence, that will be imma- 
terial, for, though it may rise in dollars and cents, it will not 
rise in goods-value. We cannot afford to make our schools less 
attractive to teachers, to repel good lawyers from the bench, to 
leave to corporations the pick of engineers and accountants, 
to invite experts to leave our institutions for private practice. 

As between falling prices and rising prices, the latter seems 
to be far the worse evil for the mass of the population. Con- 
sequently, a period of rising prices is sure to develop a spirit 
of dissatisfaction and unrest, leading, when long continued, to 
violent and even riotous demonstrations. Wage earners and 
salaried persons are subjected to constant pressure, either to 
curtail their savings for the future, or to commit extravagance 
in expenditure, or to lower their standard of living. To a 
certain extent all three results have followed the recent ad- 
vance. These consequences are gravely harmful, regarded 
from any viewpoint, in their influence upon the physical, 
economic, social and moral wellbeing of the people. 

The menace to the standard of living is the most serious 
danger. In the effort to maintain the family standard of living 
against the pressure of rising prices, various expedients have 
been employed. The swarming influx of women into the field 



524 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

of commercial employment is in part a consequence of the 
higher cost of living. While other causes have come into play 
here, it can hardly be questioned that the movement has been 
accelerated by the necessity on the part of women to take 
work outside the home in order to supplement the family 
income. Dr. Frank Julian Warne declares that the over- 
shadowing fact here is that women and girls have been forced 
into business because of necessity, in the face of the failure 
of the salary of the husband and father to increase in pro- 
portion to the advanced cost of living. They prefer to go out 
into business for wages, rather than to lower that standard. 

The race suicidal tendency in this country is also aggravated 
by the increasing expenses of family budgets. Dr. Warne 
writes as follows of the connection between the high cost of 
living and the dwindling size of the average family : — 

Every additional child in a family means additional expense; to 
the wage earner the third child usually means a close approach to the 
poverty line. And it is plain that unless this cost is forthcoming 
through a higher salary, the standard of living of the other members 
of the family must be lowered to provide for the newcomer. There 
is a point, to the salaried family, where this lowering process must 
stop; and the wife and husband have agreed to limit the number of 
children before that point is reached. They do not desire that the 
quantity shall lower the quality. This is why the average middle-class 
family nowadays has only two or three children, instead of the eight, 
ten or twelve of their parents and grandparents. 

The lowering of the standard of living, which is threatened 
by a long-continued advance of prices, is obviously fraught 
with far-reaching consequences for the nation. It means a 
deterioration of physical, economic, social and moral efficiency. 
A lower standard of living means a reduction of national 
vitality, and this affects immediately every form of activity 
and enterprise. It is not to be inferred that racial deteriora- 
tion has already begun in this country. The advance of the 
cost of living has not proceeded long enough or far enough to 
produce undervitalization and degeneration. The further in- 
crease of prices in the future, however, if not accompanied 
step by step by an expansion of wages and incomes, must in 
the end produce debilitating and demoralizing effects upon the 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 525 

national stock. The editor of the " Medical Record " of New 
York City recently pointed out this danger in the following 
words : — 

A young, vigorous, undeveloped nation ourselves, whose life blood 
is constantly freshened by a sturdy class of immigrants, such tendency 
is not yet as apparent with us as with the older nations, where greater 
congestion and fiercer competition are rapidly bringing about decadence. 
Yet if existing conditions in this country are to be allowed to prevail, 
such deterioration is undoubtedly inevitable for us, even if delayed; 
and it behooves us to look ahead and take preventive measures for 
the future accordingly. Nor does the situation admit of delay. Great 
Britain is to-day confronted by a not only numerically great but 
steadily increasing class of physical, mental and moral defectives of 
her own producing, who have in turn created problems in sociology, 
criminology and public health which threaten her very national exist- 
ence. It is stated that the average British recruit for the Crimean 
war, when England* contained a large class of well-fed, sturdy yeo- 
manry, was nearly three inches taller and nearly thirty pounds heavier 
than the average recruit for the Boer war, two generations later, when 
an undernourished, degenerate population, four out of five of which 
live in cities, was found to have developed. ... If it cannot justly be 
claimed that a large part of the American population is as yet suffer- 
ing from chronic malnutrition, — as is the case with the British masses, 
— still, it can be safely asserted that our poorer classes are already 
practically on its verge. It can also be safely asserted that if present 
conditions are allowed to persist the cost of living must continue to 
rise and the financial extremes of society become more and more widely 
separated. . . . Proper attention by us to such present conditions will 
have a profound effect in reducing the gravity of the problems which 
the physician, sociologist and statesman of the future will be called 
upon to solve. 

The ethical effects of the advance of the cost of living are 
also most far-reaching. While the acute and immediate con- 
dition underlying this thirteen-year rise in the prices of the 
necessaries of life constitutes an economic question of the first 
importance, in its broader sense the subject comes within the 
domain of morals. Any evil influence that the trusts, combina- 
tions, illegal restraint of trade, tariff, etc., have had in making 
unequal tiie burdens of the people, may be remedied by legis- 
lation. The more deeply seated economic causes may be helped 
by international agreements. But we cannot apply mathe- 



526 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

matics to human conduct, and the effect of morals on this 
question passes frontiers and is world-wide. 

The proof that these problems go deeper than science or 
political economy is that they are as old as human nature, and 
go back to the very springs of civilization. Aristotle tells of 
Thales of Miletus, a great philosopher, who, being reproached 
by his friends because he was not as rich as they were, deter- 
mined to prove to them that his poverty was wholly a matter 
of choice. Being able by his knowledge of natural laws to 
foresee that in a certain year there would be large crops of 
olives, he bought all the olive presses of Miletus, depositing in 
each case a very small sum to bind the transaction, with the 
results that there was no one but Thales to rent men the presses 
whereby they might make their oil; thus, being able to charge 
what price he pleased, he realized an enormous sum. He did 
not do this to make money, but to show that a philosopher, if 
he only chose to be selfish, could be richer than anybody else. 
Viewed in the light of this historical incident, the Standard 
Oil Company has only adopted an idea thousands of years 
old. Another incident related by Aristotle is also illuminating. 
A certain man in Syracuse bought all the iron in Sicily on so 
narrow a margin that without raising the price to the con- 
sumer he became very wealthy. " Dionysius the tyrant/' then 
king, was pleased with the ingenuity of his subject, and allowed 
him to keep his gains; but, fearful of the consequences if he 
were allowed to continue, he told this precursor of the steel 
trust that he had better leave Syracuse. 

For some of the deeper causes of the high cost of living a 
remedy can be found only in a revival of the old moral code 
and the application of sounder ethical principles for the people 
at large. If to any considerable degree the advance of the 
standard of living is accompanied by a lowering of the standard 
of morals, the net result does not spell progress. 

In Thomas Nast's most famous cartoon, made during the 
Tweed time, a score or more of the New York politicians under 
indictment were pictured in a circle with " Boss " Tweed in the 
foreground, each with an accusing finger pointing at the other, 
— an indictment which, because lacking beginning or end, was 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 527 

useless. Such a cartoon to-day might well be drawn in relation 
to the matter of high prices. The farmer accuses the middle- 
man, the middleman the jobber, the jobber the wholesaler, the 
wholesaler the retailer, the retailer the consumer, the consumer 
the trust, the trust the labor unions, the labor unions the tariff, 
until the circle is complete. Human nature likes to put the 
blame for its faults on the other fellow. The truth is that the 
fault is common to all ; the restless and critical age of riches in 
which we live has disclosed in its character the bad qualities 
formerly concealed by its poverty. The more we receive, the 
more we covet, — the inevitable consequence in all epochs of 
increased wealth. 

The disregard of the waste of natural resources, of the 
forests that house and warm us, of the waters that enrich the 
soil, a recklessness that is shown most forcibly in the neglect of 
our greatest asset, human life, indicates that freedom is made 
a pretext for selfishness. To spend money lavishly on hospitals, 
insane asylums, jails and reformatories is well, but better still 
would be a public desire to go behind the pauper, criminal 
and diseased in mind and body, to seek the causes that made 
them thus inefficient human units, and to apply the prevention, 
if it is in the public power, as it has been demonstrated largely 
to be. 

The moral as well as the financial effects of the waste from 
war on all classes are widespread. They breed a carelessness 
and contempt of business ethics; a loosening of moral and re- 
ligious conviction ; a decline in respect and reverence for law. 

Droughts, deluges, earthquakes and like physical calamities 
seem to stimulate the moral and physical elements of the race 
because they are beyond human wisdom to prevent; but human- 
made evils, which follow in the trail of the wastes of war, 
luxury, vice and crime, carry with them the deterioration of 
moral nature. The people of the world — and this does not 
apply to any class — must in high prices pay the penalties for 
waste in whatever form, for extravagance, and for contempt of 
law, order, thrift and economic science. 

In the United States we have had bountiful harvests ; by sea 
and land we have had opportunity to trade in peace with other 



528 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

nations; our various industries and enterprises have been 
active and gainful. The high prices with which we are bur- 
dened are only an indication of the scarcity that we have 
artificially and unwisely created. The effects of economic 
causes have been intensified by waste and extravagance, with 
the result that the world is now reaping, in the prosaic form 
of high prices, the natural consequences of its acts carried to 
their logical conclusion. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 529 



XII. 

CONCLUSION. 



A. FINDINGS OF THE COMMISSION. 

The findings of the commission with regard to the causes of 
the recent advance of prices are as follows : — 

1. The primary canse of the world-wide advance of prices 
since 1897 is the increase of the gold supply, which has re- 
duced the purchasing power of money and brought about a 
corresponding increase of values measured in money in all the 
leading commercial States, and at least in the United States 
has served as the basis for a vast extension of credit. 

2. The advance of prices in the United States has been 
accelerated greatly by the enormous waste of income, through 
uneconomic expenditure for war and national armament and 
through multiple forms of extravagance, both public and 
private, and of wastage, both individual and social. The in- 
creasing burden of disease, accident, crime and pauperism 
imposed upon society, and the loss through expenditure on a 
rising scale for luxuries and through wasteful methods of 
management in the household, have been potent contributing 
factors to the advance of the cost of living. 

3. The advance of prices has been further promoted by a 
complexity of causes, operating on the side of supply to reduce 
the volume and increase the expenses of production, and on the 
side of demand to extend and diversify the consumption of 
commodities. The main factors in restricting supply and en- 
hancing the cost of commodities are the drain of population 
from the land, which has decreased the proportion of persons 
engaged in producing the food supply; the exhaustion of 
natural resources, which has resulted in increased expenses of 
production or diminished returns from the soil ; and uneconomic 



530 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

methods of production and distribution, especially the latter. 
The chief influences on the side of demand which have worked 
parallel to the forces affecting supply are the growing concen- 
tration of population in great cities, which has increased the 
proportion of nonproducing food consumers; the general ad- 
vance of the standard of living, which has enlarged the require- 
ments on the part of individual consumers of all classes; and 
the national habit of extravagance, which has further extended 
and diversified the demand for comforts and luxuries created 
by the advance of the standard of living. 

4. With regard to the tariff, the trusts and the unions, which 
have been declared to be either primary or contributory causes 
of the high cost of living, the commission finds that none of 
these factors can be regarded as a direct and active cause of 
the recent increase of prices. 

With regard to the tariff, the facts that prices have fallen 
and risen during long periods without relation to changes in 
duties; that prices have been rising in Great Britain, under 
free trade; and that large increases have taken place in the 
prices of commodities not appreciably affected by the tariff, — 
show conclusively that the tariff is not a factor in the recent 
upward movement of prices in this country. On the other 
hand, however, it is clear that in a period of rising prices like 
the present the tariff cuts off possible relief to consumers by 
closing access to the cheapest sources of supply in the world's 
markets. In the past the duties on the necessities of common 
consumption, food stuffs, have been largely inoperative, because 
the country produced not only its own food supply, but a large 
surplus for exportation. The United States appears, however, 
to be approaching rapidly the turning point, when it will be- 
come, instead of a food-exporting, a food-importing country. 
Under these conditions, as the duties on food stuffs become 
actually operative, their effect must be to increase the cost of 
living to wage earners and the expenses of production to manu- 
facturers, thus hampering the development of industry and 
defeating the very purpose of the protective policy. The com- 
mission is therefore of the opinion that when the tariff shall 
further be revised, the expediency of removing all duties on food 
products should be considered carefully by the national Con- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 531 

gress ; and it hopes that the tariff commission will be equipped 
with such funds and powers as may be necessary for researches 
adequate as a basis for future changes, to be founded on 
commercial rather than political considerations. 

With reference to the trusts, the facts that the prices of trust- 
controlled commodities have not risen conspicuously ; that prices 
have advanced in other countries in which trusts have not de- 
veloped on the American scale; and that the higher prices 
of food products, including meat, are accounted for by natural 
causes and are not to be attributed to combination in any con- 
siderable degree, — indicate that the trusts cannot be held 
responsible for the late great advance of prices. On the other 
hand, however, combination undoubtedly enables a group of 
producers to take advantage of any conditions that may tend 
to advance prices and to maintain a high price level once 
established. Under existing conditions, constant vigilance with 
reference to the action of combinations, especially those dealing 
with the necessities of life, is doubly incumbent on all officials 
intrusted with the enforcement of laws against monopoly and 
combined regulation of prices. 

Concerning the labor unions, the facts that less than 10 per 
cent, of the workers of the country are organized; that the 
workers engaged in the production of the commodities that have 
risen most notably in price, especially food stuffs, are hardly 
organized at all ; and that wages have risen in less degree and at 
slower pace than the prices of commodities, the wage advance 
beginning some time after the price advance, — prove that the 
recent increase of prices cannot be attributed to the influence of 
trade unions. Concerning the deeper question of the general in- 
fluence of reduction of hours, increase of wages and trade union 
policies upon expenses of production, prices and cost of living, 
the commission expresses no opinion, on account of the impos- 
sibility of determining the exact facts required for an im- 
partial answer to this question within the time allowed for its 
investigation. 



532 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

B. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE GENERAL COURT. 

The commission submits for the consideration of the General 
Court the following suggestions concerning remedies for some 
of the influences that have contributed to the advance of the 
cost of living : — 

1. The creation of a commission of commerce, before which 
citizens may lay complaints of injustice in the distribution of 
staple articles of consumption through combination in restraint 
of trade. 

2. The creation of a commission on market improvements, 
in which the city government of Boston, the commercial boards 
and the marketmen of the city and the Commonwealth shall be 
jointly represented, the subject of municipal slaughterhouses to 
be included within the scope of its inquiry. 

3. The transformation of the Cattle Bureau into a Bureau 
of Animal Industry, with powers adequate for the purpose of 
protecting effectively the health of the people and of encour- 
aging the home supply of meat products. 

4. The extension of the services of the State free employ- 
ment offices of the Bureau of Statistics, to provide for the 
better distribution of immigrants throughout the Common- 
wealth, especially in the farming regions. 

5. The enactment of a law requiring that packages con- 
taining food products shall bear a label stating distinctly the 
amount of the net contents in units of weight, measure or nu- 
merical count. 

6. The enactment of a law empowering and requiring local 
boards of health to make regular inspection of cold-storage 
plants within their jurisdiction; and of a law prohibiting the 
fraudulent sale of cold-storage foods as fresh. 

7. The modification of the present laws relating to the joint 
use of tracks in such ways as shall permit the development of 
a trolley freight service throughout the State. 

8. The passage of a resolve instructing the State Commis- 
sioner of Weights and Measures to report to the next General 
Court what, if any, legislation is then necessary for the protec- 
tion of the public against the abuses connected with the sale of 
coal at retail in this State. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 533 

9. The passage of a resolve providing for a thorough in- 
vestigation by the Director of the Bureau of Statistics into 
the present methods of collecting, tabulating and presenting 
statistical matter in the various departments of the State gov- 
ernment, with a view to systematizing and co-ordinating the 
entire statistical service of the Commonwealth in such ways as 
shall render the published information more intelligible and 
more serviceable in promoting the improvement of the public 
health and the advancement of the industrial and commercial 
interests of the Commonwealth. 

EOBEET LUCE, Chairman. 
ALBION F. BEMIS. 
EDWARD F. McSWEENEY. 
MEDEKIC J. LAPORTE. 
HENRY ABRAHAMS. 



APPENDIX. 



Appendix A. 



PUBLIC MARKETS IN BOSTON 



[Report prepared for the Massachusetts Commission on the Cost of Living by Dr. E. M. Hart- 
well, secretary of the Statistics Department, city of Boston.] 



True to their instincts and traditions, the settlers of Boston made 
the market place a prominent feature in their town plan. What is 
now State Street appears at first to have been called interchangeably 
the Water Street and the Market Street. Its widest part, covering 
hardly three-quarters of an acre, where it opened into the High or 
Main Street to Roxbury, soon became known as the market stead or 
market place. Allusion to it as the market place is found in the 
town records as early as 1636. From 1633, when the General Court 
ordered that a market should be kept in Boston every Thursday, till 
1733, when the town voted that a market house for the middle of 
the town should be erected in Dock Square, the original market place 
was the political and business center of Boston. 

On the south side of the market place, or just below it, Governor 
Winthrop had his residence for a time. On the same side the meeting- 
house of the First Church, in which town meetings were held for many 
years, stood where the Brazer building now stands. On the southwest 
corner Capt. Robert Keayne, perhaps the leading merchant and money 
lender of the town, had his house and garden. The first shop built 
in Boston is said to have stood on the northwest corner of the market 
place, and "down the street were the lots of Rev. John Wilson (pastor 
of the First Church) and seven others." Westerly, although not im- 
mediately adjoining the market place, was the prison yard, at the head 
of the present Court Square. 

In 1640 the meeting-house was sold and a new one built, on the site 
now occupied by the Rogers building, just west of the market place. 
Some persons wished to put the new meeting-house on " the green " near 
the site of the Old South Church, but, as Governor Winthrop tells 
us, " Others viz. the tradesmen especially who dwelt about the market 
place desired it might stand still near the market, lest in time it should 
divert the chief trade from thence." Even to this day the center of the 
chief trade has scarcely shifted from its original seat. 



538 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Captain Keayne, who died in 1656, bequeathed £300 to the town 
for a conduit and a market house to be erected in the market place 
" in the heart of the towne," conceiving that the market house would — 

be usefull for the country people that come with their provisions for the 
supply of the towne, that they may have a place to sitt dry in and warme 
both in cold raine and durty weather & may have a place to leave their 
corne or any other things safe that they cannot sell, till they come again 
. . . also to have some convenient room or too for the Courts to meete in . . . 
and so for the Townes men & Commissioners of the Towne. 

So the first Town House was built in 1657-58, out of the proceeds 
of Keayne's bequest and from funds privately subscribed, which 
amounted to nearly £400 more. The house, 66 feet long and 33 feet 
wide, was of wood, and was set upon 21 pillars 10 feet high, on the 
site of the present old State House. In its structural features, as well 
as the uses to which it was put, the Town House conformed closely 
to the type then common in the old country. The space within the 
pillars was used as an exchange, " chambers " being provided up stairs 
for the courts and town officials. It continued to be the seat of the 
town government till 1742, when Faneuil Hall superseded it as a 
market and Town House. By order of the Legislature, one-half the 
cost of repairing it in 1667 and 1671 and of rebuilding it after it was 
burned in 1711 and 1747 was borne by the country, the other half 
being equally shared by the county and the town. The State offices 
were removed to the new State House in 1798. From 1830 to 1841 
the Old State House served as the City Hall. 

In the period 1633-49 the General Court granted to Boston, Charles- 
town, Salem and Lynn the right to hold weekly markets, and also gave 
Boston, Salem, Dorchester and Watertown the right to hold two fairs 
yearly within their borders. But it does not appear that either the 
markets or fairs granted to the other market towns ever rivaled the 
public market of Boston in extent or importance. 

The Thursday market in Boston was primarily a victual market, 
and belonged to the class known since the beginning of the middle ages 
throughout western Europe as weekly markets, in contradistinction to 
annual markets, which were termed fairs. The weekly market was 
one of the most ancient and vital of municipal institutions; no city or 
large town was considered complete unless it had a public place set 
apart for the purpose of enabling its indwellers to buy grain, meats, 
fruit and vegetables directly from producers at reasonable prices. 
Cities, towns and lords of manors, including monasteries, derived their 
market privileges, which were highly prized and jealously guarded, 
from the king or emperor. The right to hold a market usually carried 
with it the right to prescribe rules and ordinances for the conduct of 
the buyers and sellers, and to levy tolls upon the wares brought to 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 539 

market and fees for standing places within it. Special privileges and 
immunities were accorded to foreigners, I.e., outsiders, resorting to the 
market place. For example, during the continuance of a market or- 
dinary legal writs were suspended, and a special market court, having 
summary jurisdiction (the court of the dusty-footed), was provided, in 
order that disputes or offenses arising during market hours might be 
speedily disposed of. There was a special market peace, and molesta- 
tion of persons going to or returning from market, within certain de- 
fined limits of time and space, was forbidden, as a serious infraction of 
the king's peace. 

At the same time the weekly market was organized and regulated 
in the special interest of the consumer, for whose benefit strenuous 
efforts, continuing for hundreds of years in some places, were made to 
enable him to deal directly, but only within the market place, with the 
producer. Middlemen were looked upon with abhorrence, and statute 
books and city codes became burdened with enactments against those 
who presumed to buy provisions to sell again. Local authorities ex- 
ercised vigorously, and often successfully, their right to determine 
and prescribe " reasonable prices " in the interest of consumers. 

In this connection citations from a few charters and enactments may 
serve to indicate the character and functions of the public markets 
with which the early settlers, not only of Massachusetts but of most 
of the original colonies, were familiar. 

About 1174 King William of Scotland granted to " God and St. 
Kentigern, and to Jocelyn Bishop of Glasgow, and his successors, that 
they shall have a burgh at Glasgow, with a weekly market upon Thurs- 
day." By a second charter, in 1176, he granted his " absolute protec- 
tion to all who shall come to the markets at Glasgow ... in coming 
there, standing there and returning thence." 

The Burrowe Lawes of Scotland, published in 1609, provided that : — 

If any man in the fair finds his bondman fugitive from him, so long as 
the peace of the fair indures, he may not take or apprehend him or attack 
him. 

Among certain " statutes of the town " of Glasgow this is found : — 

It shall not be allowed to any person to buy any stuff coming to market, 
. . . till it first present the market, except freemen for their own use 
only . . . and so the hours of the market to be kept both by freemen and 
by unfreemen provided that freemen be suffered at seed time to buy their 
seed at any time they please. 

Cake bakers were forbidden by the same statute to buy malt before 
11 o'clock, under penalty of 22s. 8d. for each offence. 

King John of England acquired manorial rights in 1207 over what 
developed later into the city of Liverpool, and started there a Satur- 



540 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

day market and an annual fair. In 1229 the burgesses bought a 
borough charter from Henry III., which gave them control over all 
trade within the town. Regarding the " town's bargain " a recent 
writer says that the master of a newly arrived vessel at Liverpool — 

had to see the mayor to arrange the terms on which he would be allowed 
to dispose of his cargo. The mayor consulted with the aldermen as to 
whether the cargo or any part of it should be taken as a " town's bargain." 
If it was decided to make a town's bargain the merchant prysors were sent 
to value the cargo; they and not the seller fixed the price. If the trader 
chose to take the town's offer, his cargo was landed and weighed under the 
supervision of the merchant prysors. . . . The goods were carried to the 
common warehouse under the Town Hall. . . . Every freeman of the borough 
then had the right of taking his share of the goods, at the price fixed by the 
merchant prysors. If, however, the seller did not choose to take the town's 
offer, he might make a bargain with the mayor to have an " open market ; " 
that is, to sell his goods on his own terms. ... It does not appear that 
town's bargains were made in goods coming by land. Every one entering 
or leaving the town on market days had to pay ingate and outgate dues. . . . 
No goods brought into the town were allowed to be sold to any one but 
freemen. ... To prevent "cornering" (it was provided), "No townsman 
shall buy above eight windles of corn on one market day." To prevent 
underbuying (forestalling?), "no townsfolk, neither men, women nor 
servants, shall buy any butter, eggs or fish before the same are brought to 
the usual place of market." 

The Assembly Roll of the city of Dublin contains the following, 
under date of 1470 : — 

It is ordained by said Assembly that the butchers of the saide city shall 
sell no fiesh but only in the shambles (meat market) of the said city. And 
they to be examined by the Mayor and Bailiffs on a boke what every beast 
cost at the first buying. And they to sell after the discretion of the Mayor 
and Bailiff's (paying) them reasonably for their labors and costs. And if 
the Mayor and Bailiffs thinketh that the said butchers hath bought the said 
beasts too dear, then they shall make the price as they thinketh. And also 
that the butchers sell no flesh to none of the country afore nine of the 
clock, but only to citizens. And if any butcher doth the contrary, to pay 
at the first time xxs. without grace and to bide in warde till it be paid, and 
second time to lose his franchise, if he be a freeman, and not to occupy his 
craft during one year next following. 

The records of the city of London abound in market regulations 
and ordinances, but the following, passed by the mayor and aldermen 
and all the commonalty of the city, in 1350, may suffice : — 

Ordered that no one shall go to meet those who are bringing victuals or 
other wares by land or water to the City, for sale, for the purpose of buying 
them or bargaining for them, before they shall have come to certain places 
assigned thereto, where they ought to be sold. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 541 

Also — That the wheat and barley which come towards the City by land 
or by water, for sale, shall come wholly into the Markets, and shall be sold 
to all folks by the hands of those who bring the same, for the support and 
sustenance of their households, and to the bakers for serving the people. 
And no hosteler shall demand to have any victuals, if they be not solely for 
the sustenance of his hostel, and that, for his money down, as other folks do. 

G. E. Howard, in his book on " The King's Peace," sets forth the 
views of Lambarde (an English jurist of the sixteenth century) as 
to the meaning of engrosser, regrator and f orestaller, as follows : — 

An Ingrosser is hee that ingrosseth or getteth into his hands by buying, 
contract, or promise taking* any Corne growing in the field, or other Come 
or Grains, Butter, Cheese, Fish, or other dead victuall, within England to 
the intent to sell the same againe. 

A regrator is one who buys similar produce in a fair or market, and 
selleth the same againe in any Faire or Market kept there or within f oure 
miles thereof. 

A f orestaller is a person who buys or contracts for any " Victuall or 
wares " being carried to a market or fair, or to a city, port or haven ; or 
who in any other way attempts to enhance the price of such produce, or to 
prevent its being brought to the market to be sold. 

The doctrine that one's neighbor must be closely watched and scrupu- 
lously regulated in all his social and business relations was firmly held 
and bravely exemplified by the freemen who controlled the affairs of 
mediaeval cities and towns. Although changes which foreboded a new 
era in social and political life began in England at least a century 
before the planting of British institutions began in America, the early 
settlers clung to traditional views and methods in the conduct of trade 
and industry. 

The General Court and local authorities of Massachusetts naturally 
and without hesitation aligned themselves with consumers and em- 
ployers in their losing fight against the middlemen and laborers. 

In 1635 the General Court passed an act providing penalties against 
"such ill disposed persons, as may take liberty to oppress and wrong 
their neighbors, by taking excessive wages for their work, or unrea- 
sonable prices for such merchandizes, or other necessary commodities, 
as shall pass from man to man." In the same year the town of Boston 
ordered that a committee of three "shall sett pryces upon all cattell, 
commodities, victuals and laborers and workmen's wages and that noe 
other prises or rates shalbe given or taken." 

On the 20th of November, 1637, the General Court ordered that : — 

Common victuallers shall sell and alowe unto every of their guests such 
victuals as they shall call for . . . bee it never so meane and small in 
quantity ... at reasonable prizes, since complaint had been made that 
"diverse poor people who would willingly content themselves with meane 
dyot are forced to such dyot as is tendered them at 12d. the meale or more." 



542 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Also the sale of cakes or buns was forbidden excepting " such cakes 
as shalbe for any burial or marriage or such like special occation." 

In 1646 an act was passed by the General Court providing that 
clerks of the market should be chosen " in market towns and all other 
towns needful " to prevent the sale of bread or butter of short weight. 
The same act established the assize of bread, prescribing the weight 
of the loaf of bread according to the price of wheat and the kind of 
bread. We find the assize of bread proclaimed by the selectmen of 
Boston as late as 1798. 

In March, 1649, two clerks of the market were chosen in Boston by 
the town meeting, from which time town officers so designated appear to 
have been chosen more or less regularly till the close of the eighteenth 
century, i.e., even after the Faneuil Hall market was in charge of a 
special, paid official, appointed by the selectmen. In 1696 the clerks 
of the market numbered ten; in 1790 their number had increased to 
sixteen; in 1798 twelve clerks of the market were chosen, apparently 
one from each ward. 

In 1657, in instructions to the selectmen, the town said : — 

We think it meet . . . that orders be passed against regrators and fore- 
stalled, and our deputies get them confirmed by the General Court. 

At the March meeting in 1681, complaint having been made that 
certain persons " did as Hucksters forestall the market by going out 
into the neck and highway to Boston to buy provisions . . . and 
they sell the same at extraordinary dear rates," the town ordered that 
"the Selectmen make some prudentiall order to prevent such an abuse 
and Injury to the Town." 

In March, 1682, the deputies for Boston to the General Court were 
instructed to move the court to order : — 

(1) that candles made up for sale be under the cognizance of the Clerkes 
of the market; (2) that butter made up for sale whether in pounds or in 
larger parcels be liable to be weighed by the Clerke of the market in any 
part of Boston within the fortification; (3) that a note set up under the 
Town house upon one of the pillars concerning the price of wheat shall be 
sufficient notice to the Bakers to size their bread by; and (4) that "upon 
the first Monday of every month the men that set the price of wheate shall 
set up such a note." 

It does not appear that the General Court took action before 1696. 

In 1695 the General Court passed an act providing that imported 
provisions should not be sold by wholesale until three days' notice 
by the public crier had been given, so that all persons who wished to 
buy in small quantities at wholesale rates might have an opportunity 
to do so. This is a reminder of the town's bargain in Liverpool, but 
the act was an emergency act, and remained in force but two years. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 543 

In 1696 an act was passed by the General Court " For the Settle- 
ment and Well Ordering of a Publick Market and Fairs within the 
Town of Boston." It provided that Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sat- 
urdays should be market days, and prescribed the hours for opening 
and closing the market at different seasons of the year. Other pro- 
visions of the act were: (1) that no tax or toll on provisions brought 
to market or fees on standing places should be exacted; (2) that 
sales should not be made elsewhere than in the market; (3) that the 
selectmen should appoint one or more clerks of the market to supervise 
it and prevent frauds, abuses and disorders, and to act as sealers of 
weights and measures; and (4) that any two justices of the peace of 
Boston might exercise summary jurisdiction as a special court for 
market causes. 

Section 4 relates to forestalling, and read : — 

In regard that the market is principally intended for the benefit of house- 
keepers, who buy for their own use and behoof, that the retailers, hucksters 
and traders of the town shall not enter into the market to make their pro- 
visions and buy of any of the market people there, until the afternoon of 
every market-day (to the intent that 'the housekeepers may provide them- 
selves in the morning of every day at the first hand, and pay moderate 
rates for their provisions), on pain that every such retailer, huckster or 
trader, for every time offending herein, shall be proceeded against as a 
regrator or ingrosser. 

Notwithstanding that the act was a typical and complete market act, 
embracing eleven sections, it was explicitly provided in the last section 
that the act should remain in force for only one year from the opening 
of the market. 

On the 23d of June, eight days after the passage of the act, at a 
meeting of the justices and selectmen of Boston : — 

It was Agreed that the Market appointed by law should be kept in one 
place at Present, viz. in and about the Town house and that the market be 
opened on the 11th day of August next. 

Contemporary evidence bearing on the popular dislike of a regulated 
public market in Boston is found in the following extract from the 
" Voyages and Travels " of Captain Uring, an Englishman who visited 
Boston in 1709 on official business relating to the victualling of the 
proposed expedition against Canada. Uring says : — 

The town of Boston is plentifully supplied with good and wholesome pro- 
visions of all sorts, not inferior to those in England. Though the town is 
large arid prosperous, they could never be brought to establish a market in 
it, notwithstanding several of their governors have taken great pains to con- 
vince the inhabitants how useful and beneficial it would be to 'em; but the 
country people always opposed it, so that it could not be settled. The 



544 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

reason they give for it is, if market days were appointed, all the country 
people, coming in at the same time, would glut it, and the town people 
would buy their provision for what they pleased. So rather choose to send 
them as they think fit. And sometimes a tall fellow brings in a turkey or 
goose to sell, and will travel through the whole town to see who will give 
the most for it, and it is at last sold for 3s, and 6d. or 4s.; and if he had 
stayed at home he could have earned a crown for his labor, which is the 
customary price for a day's work. So, anyone may judge of the stupidity 
of the country people. 

To what extent the market in and about the Town House was utilized 
between 1697 and 1734, when the town voted to build three market 
houses, cannot be definitely determined from the town records; but it 
is clear that the mind of the town was divided as to the policy of re- 
stricting the sale of country produce to a limited market space. The 
country people objected to a stringently regulated market, and a con- 
siderable party within the town sympathized with them and seconded 
their opposition. The General Court seems to have been loath to take 
action, as the next act against monopoly and forestalling seems not to 
have been passed until February 8, 1778, with the curious proviso 
that it should remain in force "till October 20th next and no longer." 
However, in 1764 an act was passed (to remain in force only till August 
1, 1766) to prevent butchers, victuallers and others from encumbering 
Dock Square with their teams and stands. The act also provided that 
the market place provided by the town should be subject to regulation 
by the selectmen. 

When in 1717 complaints against forestalling by hucksters once 
more arose, and a committee reported in favor of a public market, 
their proposal was debated off and on for two years, and was then 
rejected. But the question would not down. At the March meeting 
in 1733 a " Committee to Project a Scheme for Regulating a Market " 
was chosen. On the 28th of May, on the question whether the town 
would have a market or not, the vote was 364 yeas and 339 nays. The 
scheme provided for three market places, viz.: one at the vacant place 
near the town dock; one near the Old North Meeting-House; one near 
the great tree at the South End, near the corner of the present Wash- 
ington and Essex streets. A salaried clerk was named for each of the 
proposed markets, and regulations and provisions against forestalling, 
embracing twelve articles, were set forth. Every week day was to be 
a market day. When the report finally came up for acceptance, June 
26, it was rejected by a vote of 415 nays to 390 yeas, and referred 
to the next March meeting of the town. 

On the 12th of March, 1734, the town voted, by 517 yeas to 399 
nays, to choose a committee to assign three suitable places for erecting 
markets. The committee reported on the 20th in favor of the three 
places recommended a year previously, and the town appropriated 
£700 for the erection of three market houses. On the 26th of March 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 545 

the town adopted a series of market regulations, which were practically 
identical with those recommended in 1733. A year later the accounts 
of the committee for erecting the markets, which appear to have been 
open sheds, were passed by the town, and a clerk was again chosen 
for each of the markets; but in 1736 the opponents of the new market 
policy succeeded in defeating the proposal to elect the clerks of the 
three markets, although eight clerks of the market were chosen at large. 

In 1737 a mob demolished the Centre market in Dock Square, and on 
recommendation of the selectmen the town voted to divert the North 
and South market houses to other uses. The North market was torn 
down, and that at the South End was turned into shops. 

In 1740 Peter Faneuil offered to build a market house in Dock 
Square if the town would provide for its maintenance and regulation. 
On the petition of 340 of the leading citizens of Boston a town meeting 
was held, July 14, to consider the offer. So many inhabitants assembled 
that the meeting adjourned from the Town House, in the old market 
place, to the Brattle Street Meeting-house. The petitioners argued that 
since the pulling down of the market house in Dock Square there had 
been " no certain place for Buyer and Seller to meet at, which forces 
People to go out upon the Neck and spend a great part of the Day 
in providing Necessarys for their Families." At the same time they 
proposed that if a new market house were erected " Yet the Market 
people should be at Liberty to carry their Marketing wheresoever they 
pleased about the Town in order to dispose of the same." 

After much debate the town voted, by 367 yeas to 360 nays, to accept 
Mr. FaneuiFs offer. However, it appears from the records of the 
meeting that the majority of seven was secured by recourse to an 
unusual procedure. The record reads : — 

The Inhabitants were desired to prepare their votes in writing, either 
Yea or Nay; and to bring and offer them at One of the Doors of the 
House — And the Assessors were directed to attend there with their Lists 
of Valuation of Estates and Faeultys that so None might be allow'd to 
Vote in the Affair, except such as were Qualified according to Law — And 
it was also Declared, That it is determined by the present Meeting to be 
the Sense of the Law, that No Person is Qualified to Vote in Town Affairs, 
but such as were Rated in the last Tax 2s. Id. New Tenor or 6s. 3d. Old 
Tenor, to the Province Tax, for his Personal Estate and Faculty including 
Rents if they be his Own. 

The opposition, to the number of 200, on the 10th of September 
petitioned the selectmen to call a special meeting to reopen the question, 
on the ground that many voters had been illegally deprived of their 
votes' but the selectmen, after taking legal advice, refused to call such 
a meeting. 

In 1742, September 13, the town voted unanimously to accept the 
new market house, and to open it on the 25th of the month. The 



546 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

structure was of brick, two and one-half stories high and 100 feet long 
by 40 feet wide. Access to the market was had on all sides through brick 
archways. The second story contained a hall to hold 1,000 people, 
besides various rooms for the town officials. In compliment to Mr. 
Faneuil it was voted to give his name to the hall, and to ask him to 
nominate the first clerk of the market. His nominee, " Mr. Thomas 
Jackson, Merchant," was unanimously elected. 

In 1762-63 the edifice, which had been destroyed by fire in January, 
1761, was rebuilt, partly out of the proceeds of a lottery authorized 
by the Legislature. In 1805 an enlargement, costing $56,692, was made, 
whereby the width of the building was doubled and a third story 
added. After the opening of Quincy market in 1826 the market under 
Faneuil Hall was closed for many years. It was opened again in 
1858. 

In 1742 the town annulled the by-law passed in 1734 for regulating 
the market, and adopted a new by-law, subject to the approval of the 
Court of General Sessions of the Peace. The by-law prescribed the 
duties of the clerk of the market, requiring him " to give his Constant 
Attendance at the opening of the Market, and there Abide during the 
Continuation thereof," and gave him authority to adjust disputes be- 
tween " Buyer and Seller as to Weight or Price." 

Every day not set apart for religious services was made a market 
day, and market hours throughout the year were to be from sunrise till 1 
p.m. Hucksters or retailers were forbidden to bargain for or buy pro- 
visions during market hours within the market or on the way to market, 
under penalty of 20s. The use of steelyards for weighing was for- 
bidden within the market limits, under penalty of 5s. for each offence. 

Apparently no restriction was made on the retailing of provisions 
from door to door by the country people. The exclusion of the butchers 
from the market, as shown by the following extract from the by-laws, 
is in striking contrast to present ideas and usage : — 

Whereas the Principal intent of said Market is to Encourage and Ac- 
commodate the Country People who bring Provisions into this Town for 
the more Plentiful Supplying of the Inhabitants at the First Hand with the 
same — 

It is hereby Ordered, That none of the Butchers or any other Persons 
who Buy within this Town to Sell again, shall at any time bring into the 
Market House or expose to Sale there any Sort of Necessarys or Provisions, 
and are hereby Excluded all stalls and standings in the same. 

The by-law authorized the selectmen to apportion the size of the stalls 
in the market house and to sell or let the same. It was silent touching 
any charge upon market people for standing places outside the house. 

The size of Boston at the time the Faneuil Hall market was first 
opened may be inferred from the following census returns made to the 
selectmen in December, 1742 : — 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 547 

Souls, 16,382 

Houses, 1,719 

Wharves, 166 

Negroes, 1,374 

Horses, 418 

Cows, 141 

It was also stated that there were some 1,200 widows, of whom 1,000 
were in " low circumstances." 

Opposition to public markets still continued. By vote of the town 
the market house was closed from April, 1747, till March, 1748. At the 
March meeting in 1748 the town was called on to consider whether 
the market should be reopened, and what should be done to prevent 
forestalling and the enhancement of prices by country butchers. Later 
the town adopted a plan, recommended by a committee composed of 
leading men, whereby the selectmen were authorized to contract with a 
number of town butchers to purchase cattle and supply beef on three 
days of the week in the market to inhabitants, at prices to be established 
from time to time by the selectmen. The butchers were to receive a 
commission of 5 per cent, and the offal. The cattle were bought out of 
a subscription fund placed at the disposal of the selectmen, and an 
agent was appointed to pay for the cattle and receive the proceeds from 
the beef sold in the market. About £25,000 was expended for cattle 
during the continuance of the experiment. In March, 1749, the town 
voted " not to supply Faneuil Hall Market n further, but to continue that 
market as an " open market." But dissatisfaction still continued with 
the price of provisions, and in 1752 the market was again closed. 
From 1753 till 1761, when the building was destroyed by fire, the 
market was kept open. The town voted to rebuild, but not to improve 
the lower part as a market till further order. 

In 1763 the selectmen were instructed by the town to open Faneuil 
Hall market " as soon as it is repaired." The records of the selectmen 
show that in 1764 both hall and market were occupied. 

The market under Faneuil Hall and in the space around it seems 
to have been kept up for more than sixty years, or from 1763 until 
the opening of the new Faneuil Hail market, August 26, 1826. 
Throughout this period < complaints continually recur, with varying 
degrees of insistence. The evils complained of were : first, the nuisance 
caused by the crowding of countrymen's wagons and teams in the 
market space and the streets leading to it ; and second, " the pernicious 
practice of forestalling." A variety of remedies were mooted, and 
repeated appeals to the Legislature were made for more comprehensive 
and effective laws toward securing reasonable prices; but in the main 
the town had to rely on its own by-laws and the activity and vigilance 
of its selectmen and market officials. 

In 1778 the town adopted the recommendation of a committee to 



548 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

consider " the excessive price of provisions in Boston," which advised 
that " a spirited memorial be presented to the Legislature for an act 
against forestalling," and that the " more opulent inhabitants be recom- 
mended to avoid having more than two dishes of meat on the same day 
on their table, and to abstain from poultry; and that the inhabitants 
agree universally to make two dinners a week on fish." Accordingly, 
the price of fish was promptly enhanced. 

In 1764, as has been noted, the General Court passed an act for- 
bidding butchers, victualers and others from encumbering Dock Square, 
and placing the market place under the regulations of the selectmen; 
but the act expired by limitation in two years. In February, 1779, an 
act against monopoly and forestalling was passed, particularly to pre- 
vent enhancement of the price of grain until October 20 ensuing. 
Chapter 29, Acts of 1783, "For Regulating the Market in Boston," 
established the boundaries of two markets for hay and wood, one in 
Common Street (Tremont Street), opposite the Granary burying 
ground, and another in North Square. It also provided that if any 
person coming to market were found staying more than half an hour 
in any public place or street except the market place he should be 
liable to pay 2s. for each offence. On the petition of about thirteen 
towns the Legislature kindly repealed the act in less than a year. 

At various times the town exacted a fee from marketmen for occupy- 
ing stands or stalls within the market space. Such fees were charged 
at least as early as 1765 and as late as 1798. In 1779 officers were 
appointed to be stationed on the Neck and at the ferry to Charlestown, 
to prevent forestalling at those points or beyond. While the act of 1779 
was in force, the town adopted an extensive schedule of wages for 
laborers and artisans, and set limits to the profits of retailers of 
European wares, as well as of innholders, hucksters and fishmongers. 
But 1779 was an altogether extraordinary year. Not even in 1776 had 
the attempt to regulate prices been so general or strenuous either in 
Boston or the Province. 

Market reform continued to be a more or less urgent question until 
1825, when the corner stone of the new Faneuil Hall market house was 
laid. From time to time the number of stands in the market space was 
increased, and special areas were allotted to the sale of special wares, 
e.g., fish and vegetables. The market by-law was revised from time to 
time, notably in the years 1798, 1813 and 1817, but without satisfactory 
result so far as the prevention of the multiplication of middlemen and 
the increase of their activity was concerned. Quincy's " Municipal 
History of Boston " bears emphatic testimony on this point, as 
follows : — 

On market days Union, Elm, Brattle, Washington and Exchange streets 
were often completely obstructed. Farmers were compelled to take their 
stand along Union Street as far as Marshall's Lane (street), and in Washing- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 549 

ton Street as far as Court Street; they were thus excluded from the space 
around Faneuil Hall, where their customers chiefly resorted, and were often 
obliged to sell their goods to forestallers, greatly to their loss and discontent. 
Forestalling became consequently not only a lucrative but an acknowledged 
employment. Individuals engaged in it, when prosecuted, were seldom con- 
victed by juries, since, from the many obstructions arising from the local 
inadequacy of the market to all fair competition, forestalling seemed to be 
indispensable for the interests both of the farmer aud the citizens. Such 
were the general relations and accommodations of the central market of the 
city at the commencement of the second administration. 

At that time (1823) the whole space occupied by stalls in Faneuil 
Hall market did not exceed 14,000 square feet. 

It may be noted that the growth of population and the inadequacy 
of the old market had led to the establishment of private market houses. 
Thus the Boylston market with 12 stalls, and the Parkman market on 
Grove and Cambridge streets were opened in 1810, and the City market 
on Brattle Street followed in 1819. 

The erection of the new Faneuil Hall market house encountered many 
difficulties, but was brilliantly accomplished in the period 1823-26, 
thanks to the energy, sagacity and patience of Mayor Quincy and his 
supporters in the city government and among the citizens. The under- 
taking was one of the most notable and successful enterprises ever 
undertaken by the city. Boston was pre-eminent for a generation among 
American cities for the superiority of its market house. The market 
houses erected in 1657 and 1749 were of the mediaeval European type, 
being supported by posts or brick arches, so that there was a half -open 
market space underneath the rooms set apart for public meetings and 
the use of the town officials. When Faneuil Hall was enlarged, in 1805, 
the brick archways were filled up. The Quincy market house has been 
from the first an enclosed building, except for windows, with doorways 
in the middle and at the ends. 

The market improvement involved the purchase and razing of numer- 
ous stores and wharves and the filling in of the town dock and adjacent 
flats. As a final result, the city acquired: (1) a well-appointed granite 
market house, two stories high, 535 feet long and 50 feet wide, covering 
27,000 feet of land, with cellars underneath, at the cost of $150,000; (2) 
six new streets (and the. enlargement of a seventh), including 167,000 
feet of land; besides (3) flats, docks and wharf rights to 142,000 
square feet. According to Mayor Quincy, the report of the city auditor 
for 1826 showed : — 



Total expenditures by committee, 
Less sales of land, etc., . 

Apparent debt, . 
Demands and notes receivable, 

Apparent debt, . . . 



$1,141,272.33 
532,797.33 

$608,475.00 
224,204.26 

$384,270.74 



550 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

By 1848 the debt was extinguished, and by 1892 the undertaking had 
yielded nearly $3,000,000 above all expenses. 

However, in 1854 the city government was besought to sell the 
market building. 

The new market was placed in charge of a single official, designated 
as clerk. Since 1852 the officer in charge has been superintendent. 

The first ordinance for the regulation of the new market house was 
passed November 13, 1826, and contained, among other provisions, the 
following: that no cart, wagon, etc., containing beef, mutton or lamb, 
shall be allowed to stand within North and South Market streets, except 
such as shall be owned by the farmers bringing the produce of their 
own or their neighbors' farms for sale. The sale of provisions in the 
business streets outside of the market limits was prohibited. 

In 1833 a new ordinance for the regulation of Faneuil Hall market 
was passed. Its only important original provision was this : — 

No inhabitant of the city of Boston, or of any town which is less than 
fifteen miles distant from said city, shall at any season of the year, without 
the permission of the Clerk of the Faneuil Hall market, be suffered to occupy 
any stand, with cart, sleigh, or otherwise, for the purpose of vending any 
articles within the limits of said market, unless said articles are the produce 
of his own farm, or of some farm in his neighborhood. 

In 1843 an ordinance was passed fixing the limit at twenty miles. In 
1846 the ordinance was amended to provide that no person should, 
without permission of the clerk, occupy any stand within the limits of 
the market for the purpose of vending articles, unless he should satisfy 
the market officers, by legal proof or his own certificate in writing, 
that all the articles were the produce of his own farm or of some farm 
not more distant than 3 miles from his own dwelling house. 

Under this ordinance it appears that a large number of " irregulars " 
got stands, and, instead of selling the produce of their own farms, 
began a system of buying and selling in the streets and within the 
market limits. Great confusion was produced. The market carts came 
into the city early Sunday evening, and at 12 o'clock midnight there 
was generally a good deal of swearing and some fighting, and a consider- 
able police force was required to keep the peace. To remedy this evil, 
the clerk of the market was authorized to assign stands for carts and 
wagons, and to demand and receive such rates of charge therefor 
as he might establish, under the direction of the mayor and aldermen. 

A new ordinance, passed in 1852, provided that no charge should be 
made for stands outside of the market building. No person was allowed 
to stand within the market limits for the purpose of vending articles, 
unless he satisfied the superintendent that the articles were the product 
of his own farm or of some farm not more distant than 10 miles from 
his own dwelling house. The superintendent was authorized to assign 
stands, and to allow them to be taken the evening previous to market 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 551 

day by those persons who came a greater distance than 15 miles from 
Boston with produce for market. The ordinance also provided that any 
person might offer and sell meat, poultry and vegetables from house to 
house, in any of the public streets, on all days when Faneuil Hall 
market was open. 

In consequence of an attempt made in 1857 to restrict further the 
permission to occupy stands within the market limits, the Legislature 
in 1859 passed an act containing the following provisions : — 

The City of Boston shall make no by-law, ordinance or regulation exclud- 
ing from the occupation of street stands within the limits of Faneuil Hall 
market, in said city, as the same are, or may be defined in the city ordi- 
nances, for the sale of fresh provisions and perishable produce, any persons 
taking such stand for the sole purpose of selling such fresh provisions or 
perishable produce, provided the same are the product of the farm of the 
person offering them for sale, or of some farm within ten miles of the 
residence of such person; or are to be sold at wholesale only by the party 
offering them for sale on commission, for, or as agent for, some person or 
persons residing or having a usual place of business within eight miles of 
said market; or are meats to be sold at wholesale only by the person who 
slaughtered the animals of which the same was a part. 

The said city shall make no by-law, ordinance, or regulation prohibiting 
the occupation of stands within said limits, and the sale of fresh provisions 
and perishable produce, by the persons hereinbefore mentioned, between the 
hours of four o'clock in the afternoon and the time of closing said market 
at night, or before eleven o'clock in the forenoon, except on Sunday and 
holidays. 

Says the joint special committee on free markets, in 1870 : — 

These frequent changes in the ordinances were the result of complaints, 
either that the sale of provisions by the producers was restricted, or that 
restrictions were needed to prevent speculation, and so both methods — the 
limited and the unlimited — were tried alternately. 

The act of 1859 appears never to have been repealed. The following 
rules and regulations as to the use of the streets within the market 
limits, as established by the Board of Street Commissioners under the 
authority of chapter 376 of the Acts of the Legislature of 1896, were 
adopted May 12, 1909 : -r- 

Section 1. In streets in said market limits, not including sidewalks, 
persons may sell from wagons or other vehicles, fresh provisions and perish- 
able produce, provided, such provisions or perishable produce are the product 
of the farm of the person offering them for sale, or of some farm within 
ten miles of the residence of such person, or are to be sold at wholesale 
only by the person offering them for sale on commission for, or as agent 
for, some person or persons not residing or having a usual place of business 
within eight miles of said market; or are meats to be sold at wholesale only 
by the persons who slaughtered the animals of which the same were a part. 



552 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Section 2. Persons who are the principal tenants of ground floors or 
basements of buildings abutting on streets within the said market limits and 
who are regularly engaged in the business of selling fresh provisions or 
perishable produce, may occupy from time to time by themselves or their 
employees, without license or fee, . . . for the sale of said goods at whole- 
sale, and not at retail, parts of the roadway in front of their respective 
premises with horse drawn vehicles, either backed to or drawn parallel with 
the curb . . . and in like manner parts of the roadway in front of the 
premises of other persons engaged in the same business within said market 
limits for the purpose of selling to them or offering to them for sale said 
fresh provisions or perishable produce. 

Stands in South Market Street are assigned weekly by the superin- 
tendent of the market, but no fee is charged for their use. The present 
market limits in Boston, as established by act of Legislature in 1896, 
embrace more than SO 1 /^. acres. The business of this section, which 
in 1825 was preponderantly that of a retail market for the special 
benefit of the inhabitants of Boston, who then numbered about 58,000, 
has enormously expanded, both as regards the area devoted to the 
business and the extent of the territory served by it; and the character 
of the business has been almost totally transformed, as well. The retail 
business carried on either within the two markets or within the market 
limits is now of comparatively small extent and slight importance. The 
provision business done within the market district is predominantly a 
wholesale business, which serves not only Boston and Greater Boston 
but in a large measure all of eastern and northeastern New England. 
In some special lines at certain seasons of the year the Boston market 
does a good business with some of the large cities of the middle States, 
and with hotels in the Carolinas, Georgia, Florida and even Bermuda. 

The middlemen, under the new political and economic conditions 
that have arisen in the last eighty years, have developed enormously in 
number and in the extent of their operations. In January of the present 
year there were within the limits of the city of Boston, but outside of 
the established market limits, 1,441 retail dealers who sold provisions 
and 1,503 who sold vegetables, not to speak of 329 fruit dealers and 
125 retail dealers in fish. In addition, there were more than 1,200 
licensed peddlers, many if not most of whom sell fish, fruit and vege- 
tables, as the seasons change. In 1850 in Boston outside the market 
limits there was 1 retail dealer, not including hawkers, to every 415 of 
the population; in 1865 there was 1 to every 260; in 1870, 1 to every 
237; and at present there is 1 for every 185 inhabitants. 

The records and documents of the city government show that from 
time to time a demand has arisen for the establishment of free markets 
outside the market district in the outlying sections of the city. Peti- 
tions for such markets were presented in 1848 and 1851, and again in 
the years 1865 and 1870, when the demands were insistent enough to 
lead to the appointment of special committees to consider at length the 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 553 

questions thus raised. The reports upon markets in Boston, made by 
special committees of the city government in 1865, 1870 and 1875, are 
the most important that have been made upon the subject. The situa- 
tion in 1865 is thus characterized in the report of the Joint Special 
Committee on Free Markets, contained in City Document, No. 100, 
1865 : — 

As our markets stand, the city owns the building in and around which 
is our principal market, and regulates the sale of provisions in the surround- 
ing streets. The stalls and cellars in the market house are let at a fixed 
rent, for a term of years, to permanent tenants for selling at wholesale or 
retail all kinds of meats and provisions. In the surrounding streets farmers 
from any distance may sell their own products in such quantities as they 
choose, and persons acting as agents for farmers who live more than 8 miles 
from the city may sell at wholesale without charge of any kind; and persons 
are allowed to go from house to house (although not to stand at any fixed 
point) in all parts of the city to sell meat and provisions, with no restriction 
as to the sale being by the producer. But the public market and the street 
sales are by no means the chief resorts for domestic supplies. There are in 
Boston : — 

Stores for the sale of meat, 24 

Stores for the sale of vegetables, 63 

Stores for the sale of meat and vegetables, 201 

Stores for the sale of groceries and provisions, 327 

Stores for the sale of groceries and vegetables, 49 

Stores for the sale of vegetables and fish, . . . . . . 5 

Occupied stalls (in private market houses), of which 42 are for the 

sale of meat alone, 70 

Total, 739 

Over these no control is exercised more than over any business, except in 
prohibiting, as at the public market, the sale of decayed or unwholesome 
articles. 

It is estimated that not more than 500 families are supplied from the 
stalls of Faneuil Hall market, while the remaining thousands obtain their 
supplies either in the streets around Faneuil Hall market, from the per- 
ambulating carts or at the private markets or provision stores. 

The practical operation of our market system is somewhat like this: the 
live stock which supplies us comes not from the surrounding country nor 
from New England alone, but from the Canadas, New York and the west; 
it is purchased by drovers and brought to Brighton and Cambridge, and 
there sold in large and small lots to two classes of market men, — those 
who kill for their own wholesale or retail trade, and those who kill to sell 
by the side or quarter to retailers, either in Faneuil Hall market or in 
private markets. The latter class are permitted to occupy a large part of 
the space in South Market Street without charge, and there the provision 
dealers and small traders come for their supplies. The supply of vegetables 
is more a matter of domestic control, and wagons come from all sections of 



554 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

the surrounding country, to the distance of 30 or 40 miles, laden with field 
produce of all descriptions ; and they are permitted to stand, without charge, 
in South Market, North Market, Commercial and adjoining streets, and they 
sell at wholesale or retail, as suits their convenience. The men who go 
about the streets retailing from wagons, either meat or vegetables, are 
seldom producers, but almost invariably hucksters, selling an inferior article 
at of course a very low price. Quite rarely a farmer goes about with a load 
of vegetables, but in that case it will be found that his prices vary but little 
from the current rates; the reason why he sells in that way is because the 
market is glutted, and he cannot find a ready customer for his whole load 
in South Market Street. 

In New York and Philadelphia, the two largest cities in the Union, the 
corporations control the markets, in a manner varying somewhat from our 
system. In the former city the great bulk of the marketing is done at the 
market places owned by the city, the stalls of which are rented in the same 
manner as with us; but, in addition thereto, the vegetable and fruit wagons 
which stand in the neighboring streets are taxed from 15 to 30 cents a 
day, according to the size of the wagon, for the privilege of the stand. The 
private markets correspond with our provision stores. The course of trade 
is much the same as in Boston. 

Until a recent period the city of Philadelphia has entirely controlled its 
market facilities; and its market places, stretching from one confine of the 
municipality to another, have been noted as an evidence of the wisdom and 
foresight of the originators of that plan. These houses are more or less 
open, with one row of stalls on each side; and, being situated in the middle 
of a very wide street, there is ample room for carts and teams to stand 
alongside the stalls without obstructing travel. And this market has been, 
and is now, more a farmers' market than those of New York or Boston. 
From all the surrounding country of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, a most 
fertile region, the farmers flock in with vegetables, small meats and dairy 
produce, rendering monopoly impossible, and giving the best opportunity of 
establishing the virtue of the most diffuse competition with the least attend- 
ant expense, the rents of stalls being scarcely more than nominal. Yet, not- 
withstanding the acknowledged high character of these markets as compared 
with those elsewhere, the people of Philadelphia have become greatly dis- 
satisfied with the system, and a large portion of the street markets have 
been torn down, while those which remain are but thinly tenanted; and in 
place of them private corporations have built handsome structures, accom- 
modating from 200 to 700 stalls, and to these — where the rent is higher — 
the people go to buy their supplies. True, the street markets have their 
patrons, but, as a rule, the produce and meats are not up to the standard 
and quality as established in the private markets. The teams of farmers 
are allowed to stand in certain streets to sell meat and produce, but huck- 
sters are not. The privilege is not availed of by many who sell anything 
above the very lowest grade of marketable stuff. 

The report goes on to consider the complaints against market prac- 
tices in Boston, and says : — 

The subject of inquiry is the expediency of establishing, either instead of 
or in addition to the present public markets, free markets in different sec- 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 555 

tions of the city, with a view to the cheapening of the necessaries of life, by 
bringing the producer and consumer in closer contact. The persons who came 
before the committee to advocate on general terms " free markets " were not 
coincident in their views. While some were in favor of abolishing the present 
market entirely, and substituting for it open sheds in different parts of the 
city, where farmers and butchers may stand with their teams and retail their 
products, others would have the city retain the present market and build the 
sheds in addition; and still others advocated the complete divorce of the city 
from the whole market business, leaving it open to private individuals to 
erect markets as they choose, simply requiring them to consult the health and 
cleanliness of the community. All, however, agreed in alleging an odious 
monopoly at the Faneuil Hall market. The committee could obtain no evi- 
dence directly bearing on this point, but the petitioners strenuously insisted 
that the aggregation of men and of capital must produce combination and 
monopoly. The only statement which approached the confirmation of this 
allegation was an instance of a man who allowed to rot, and threw into the 
dock, a lot of perishable merchandise, rather than to sell it at a fair 
price. . . . 

The committee, in view of all the facts obtained by them, are of the 
opinion that, theoretically and practically, Faneuil Hall market is freer, 
more open to competition, stocked with better provisions and proportionately 
cheaper than any large public market they have seen. The new uptown 
markets in New York and the handsome private market in Philadelphia 
are the best markets we have visited; but the average of prices was pro- 
portionately higher than in Boston. 

The committee had implicit confidence in the doctrine of supply and 
demand. For instance, concerning the price of meat it says : — 

If Boston cannot be supplied with beef from the pastures of New England, 
but is obliged to send to Ohio and Indiana for a portion of its supply, of 
course the New England farmer can obtain for his cattle at Brighton as 
much as it has cost to bring the cattle from Ohio and Indiana to the same 
place. Thus it is that the demand governs the price. A curious illustration 
of this is furnished by a scrap of history of our Boston market. When the 
people thought the price of beef too high, they resolved to eat fish twice 
a week; but their resolution had scarcely gone into effect when the fish- 
mongers, in consequence of the excessive demand, raised their prices; and so 
the people went back to the diet which their appetites craved, and prices were 
once more established upon those laws which, except in very rare instances, 
govern trade in all commodities, — the laws of supply and demand, or rather 
of production and demand. 

One important element of price is the fact that in no other place is beef 
cut to so good advantage to the consumer, and in no other place are fowls 
so well cleaned, as in Boston. Elsewhere the roasting pieces of beef include 
a large part of the ribs that with us is corned; and in every other place the 
poultry is sold with head and entrails. 

Upon the point of openness to competition and freedom from restraint 
injurious to the consumer, the recital of the provisions of the ordinance 
would seem to answer all cavil. They are in these words: — 

" Xo person shall be allowed to occupy a street stand within the limits of 



556 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

said market unless for the sole purpose of selling fresh provisions or perish- 
able produce, the product of the farm or of the person offering them for 
sale, or of some farm within ten miles of the residence of such person, or 
of offering the same for sale at wholesale, on commission for or as agent 
for some person or persons not residing or having a usual place of business 
within eight miles of said market; and meats shall be sold at wholesale only 
by the person who slaughtered the animals of which the same were a part." 
(City Ordinance.) 

" Any person may go from town to town, or from place to place, or from 
dwelling house to dwelling house in the same town, exposing for sale and 
selling fruits and provisions . . . agricultural products of the United States, 
the product of his own labor or the labor of his family." (Statutes, chapter 
50, sect. 13, Hawkers and Peddlers.) 

Theoretically and practically, this is far in advance of any system in vogue 
elsewhere. Both in New York and Philadelphia the men who stand in the 
streets are made to pay a daily fee for their privilege, and are liable to a 
fine for selling elsewhere; while, in proportion to the business transacted and 
the accommodation afforded, the open markets in Philadelphia (something 
like which we understand to be asked for here) pay a higher tax than the 
stalls in Faneuil Hall market. 

One other allegation against the markets — that the stalls always bring 
a bonus when the party retires, and that the market men are accumulating 
fortunes — we feel bound to notice. It is true premiums have been paid, 
nominally for stalls, but really for the good will of a successful business; 
and we believe they are no greater than are paid in every other branch of 
business for a precisely similar consideration. The same practice of selling 
good will prevails in New York and Philadelphia, and is entirely just. So 
far as we know, the marketmen, while they have perhaps been more generally 
successful than men engaged in other branches of business, have not amassed, 
except in rare instances, more than a comfortable independence. 

The conclusion of the committee was : — 

There is the strongest disposition on the part of the committee to facilitate 
any practical plan to reduce the prices of food, for the benefit of all classes 
of the community. None has been suggested to them, and their investiga- 
tions have led them to conclude that any interference with our present sys- 
tem may be hurtful rather than beneficial. 

The conclusion of the committee seems lo have been highly approved 
by the leading butchers and dealers in the market, and the marketmen 
engaged in the farming and producing business in the towns around 
Boston. 

In 1870 another joint special committee of the Boston city govern- 
ment was appointed, to consider the question of free markets. The 
committee did as Boston committees on markets have so often done, 
i.e., visited some of the principal cities of the country, for the purpose 
of investigating the character of their public and private markets. The 
committee found that most of the cities which they visited — 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 557 

enjoy facilities superior to this city in regard to the extent of spaces set 
apart for market purposes, and all of them possess advantages which we 
do not for obtaining supplies; that the Faneuil Hall markets were superior 
to the markets of any other city as regards cleanliness, the general manner 
of conducting the business and the quality of the articles sold. The com- 
mittee finds that provision stores and stalls increased in the period 1865-70 
to the number of 315. Within the existing market limits there are 165 
stalls and 32 cellars, and accommodations for about 200 wagon stands, which 
at times do not suffice to accommodate more than half of the wagons 
coming to market. Although there were 4,212 beeves slaughtered at 
Brighton in two weeks in July, only 560 of that number were used by 
occupants of the Faneuil Hall market. 

The committee say that, as the business was carried on at that time, 
when only three of the dealers in the market bought their beef on the 
hoof : — 

It would be extremely difficult to form a successful combination to con- 
trol prices at the cattle market, in the face of the free and open competition 
which exists. The only relief to be looked for in this direction is in en- 
larged and improved facilities of transportation of cattle from the west, 
and in improved and more economical methods of conducting the slaughter- 
ing business. . . . Among other complaints against the Faneuil Hall market 
is this, — that it controls the price of articles sold from wagons in its 
vicinity. This is denied by the occupants of the market. But, while it is 
evident that there is no direct understanding between the lessees of the 
stalls and the occupants of the street stands, the result, so far as the con- 
sumer is concerned, is substantially the same as it would be if there were 
such an understanding. ... It is well known to householders who obtain 
their supplies from the small provision stores that the prices of certain 
commodities are kept up at those stores until forced down by the quotation 
of prices at Faneuil Hall market. 

The conclusions of the committee may be summarized as follows: 
one thing appears to be clearly established by the inquiry, namely, that 
the city by building a great market house has concentrated trade in 
one locality, which by the increase of population has been rendered 
wholly insufficient for its accommodation, and has at the same time 
prevented any competition on the part of private enterprise which 
could be really effective. Having produced this state of things, the 
city is bound to act in such a manner in the future as will prevent the 
citizens from suffering any loss or inconvenience on account of its 
past policy. 

It appeared from a careful examination that there was no locality 
in the old portion of the city of sufficient size for a market house 
which could be obtained for any price that would be regarded as a 
reasonable one for the purpose. The committee therefore decided to 
rest their inquiry upon a recommendation that suitable lots of land 
should be bought and set apart in different sections; namely, in the 



558 COST OF LIVING. [May 

Highlands, and at Dorchester, South Boston and East Boston, where 
accommodations might be afforded at an early day, either by the city 
or by private corporations under municipal regulation, for providing 
the residents of those localities with provisions upon the most favorable 
terms. 

The recommendation of the Joint Special Committee of Free Mar- 
kets, in 1870, that the city of Boston establish free markets in the 
outlying districts, proved fruitless. From 1873 till 1875 the farmers 
appear largely to have deserted Faneuil Hall market, and to have 
utilized an open space covering 50,000 square feet, leased by the city for 
the purposes of a vegetable market. In 1875 a committee of the City 
Council recommended that the city lease a tract of 80,000 square feet 
from the Mercantile Wharf Corporation on Atlantic Avenue and Mer- 
cantile Street, near the present Clinton Market, for the purposes of a 
vegetable market. But this was not done; instead, the present vegetable 
market was established by the Mercantile Wharf Corporation. The 
farmers still resort to it. 

From 1866 to 1896 the market limits embraced an area of about 4 
acres in the section bounded by Faneuil Hall Square, North and South 
Market streets and Commercial Street, between North and South 
Market streets. The present market limits, embracing 30.68 acres, 
were established by chapter 376, Acts of 1896. These limits include the 
territory bounded by Dock Square and North Street on the west, Rich- 
mond Street on the north, Atlantic Avenue on the east, and State and 
Chatham streets, Merchants' Row and Faneuil Hall Square on the 
south. 

The following is a brief description of the principal private markets 
in Boston : — 

1. The Clinton market, situated on Clinton Street, between Mercantile 
Street and Atlantic Avenue, is a two-story wooden structure, sheathed with 
corrugated iron, 350 by 200 feet, about 52,000 square feet area. It was 
established in 1877. It is a wholesale meat market on the ground floor, 
with offices in second story, but has no cellar. A two-spur track runs under 
the central part of the building, accommodating 12 large refrigerator cars. 
The trade is mostly in beef, and nearly all sections in this market are leased 
to Chicago packers. The market has 12 stores or sections, of varying size. 
In each section are wooden floors, running water and electric lights; system 
of refrigeration is brine circulation through pipes, received from local cold- 
storage company. 

2. The Mercantile Wharf Corporation owns and operates a wholesale 
vegetable market on Richmond Street, between Mercantile Street and At- 
lantic Avenue, which contains about 81,000 feet. It is claimed to be the 
largest vegetable market east of New York. There are two large wooden 
sheds, covering about 85,000 square feet, which contain 60 stands. There 
are also four wooden and two brick and stone buildings, separated by 
private streets, which are owned and cleaned by the company. These build- 
ings are two stories in height, the main floor being devoted to stores and 



1910.] HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 559 

the upper story to offices and storage. There are no cellars under the build- 
ings. The stores all do a wholesale business, buying from local farmers and 
from all other points. There are 55 sections leased to dealers in vegetables. 
The market also has an oyster and fish section, in a separate building -100 
by 40 feet backing on a wharf. All the wooden buildings are sheathed with 
corrugated iron. 

3. The Boston & Maine produce market is in Charlestown. It occupies 
a one-story wooden structure, with lofts, covered outside and between sec- 
tions inside with corrugated steel. The building is 1,500 by 40 feet. On 
one side of the building is a double track siding, with capacity of 80 cars; 
other side of the building is used for delivery purposes. It is chiefly a 
wholesale potato market. It contains 19 sections leased as stores, with small 
connecting offices in some cases. In the year, ending June 30, 1907, 8,067 
carloads of potatoes were received, against 739 loads of other produce. 

4. The " T " Wharf Fish Market Corporation occupies a building 728 by 
50 feet. The market portion, wooden 3-story structure, is sheathed with tin. 
Front end of structure, brick building, 3 stories in height, about 40 to 70 
feet, is leased for stores and offices. The first story of the market is devoted 
to 30 stalls; on the second floor there are 15 offices and 15 lofts over the 
other 15 stalls. The third story is given up wholly to lofts. It is a whole- 
sale market, with floors of wood. There is a wharf 728 feet in length for 
loading and unloading fish on both sides of the market. On one side the 
wharf is 25 feet wide; on the other, the wharf varies from 20 to 40 feet in 
width. About 30 vessels can be accommodated at a time. 

5. The Lakeman market, corner Blackstone and Xorth streets, occupies 
part of the ground floor of a stone business block. A wholesale and retail 
meat market covers a space of about 75 by 45 feet ; 6 stalls are leased. 

6. The Blackstone market, 76-86 Blackstone Street, contains 19 stalls. 
It is on the ground floor and cellar of a business block. This is a whole- 
sale and retail meat and vegetable market, covering a space of about 85 
by 50 feet. 

7. The Central market, at 50 Xorth Street, occupies one floor of a brick 
building. It has no cellar. It is devoted to the sale of meats, wholesale and 
retail. Its dimensions are 100 by 40 feet. It contains 20 stalls. 

8. The Washington market, at 1885 Washington Street, is a general 
retail market. The building is a one and one-half story brick structure, with 
ground floor and cellar divided into stalls. The building is 300 by 60 feet, 
and has 3 stores in the front part of building and 55 stalls devoted to 
market purposes. There are also 55 stalls in the cellar, which are mostly 
used for storage; but a part of the space is leased to manufacturing con- 
cerns which make cider, birch beer and tonics. The market has wooden 
floors, gas and electric lights and water in each stall. Vegetables and fruit 
are bought mostly from farmers, and the market owns a side area adjoin- 
ing building, about 250 by 60 feet, for stand space. This area can accom- 
modate 80 teams. The market is chiefly patronized by residents of the 
South End. 

Although the public markets of New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and 
Washington have developed on lines that are similar in many respects, 
they present some interesting points of difference. In the first place, 



560 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

except in Boston, most of the market houses are without cellars. At 
present there are 164 stalls and 55 cellars in the two Boston markets, 
leased to 101 firms or individuals. Again, the Boston market house 
since 1826 has been an enclosed building, in which permanent stalls 
leased to dealers are used every day in the week except Sundays and 
holidays. The marketmen have never been obliged to remove the 
contents of their stalls in the present houses at the close of market 
hours. In New York most of the public markets have long been 
enclosed buildings, though of less substantial and imposing character 
than the granite market house in Boston. Further south, as in Phila- 
delphia and Baltimore, the usual type of market house is a low shed, 
open at the sides and ends, occupied by the lessees of stalls during 
market hours only. In Baltimore, which alone among the cities named 
has followed the policy of building new market houses in the outlying 
sections as the city has spread and increased in population, the market 
days differ in the several markets, so that dealers lease stalls in the 
various markets, and offer their wares first in one market and then in 
another, according to the market calendar. Baltimore markets still 
retain their character of retail markets, frequented mostly by consumers, 
and for the most part have not developed into distinctively wholesale 
markets, such as the Quincy market has become. Baltimore has 12 
district market houses, besides a wholesale fish market and a wholesale 
produce market house built since the fire in 1905. New Orleans main- 
tains about 20 market houses in different parts of the city. In New 
York, Philadelphia and Baltimore, standing places in the spaces 
around the market houses are alloted to farmers and gardeners, who 
are required to pay a small daily fee for occupying them. New 
York's newest public market in De Lancey Street, for push cart 
peddlers and retail fish dealers, was established about five years ago 
in the open space under the New York end of the Williamsburg bridge. 

The committee of the Boston city government that reported on free 
markets in 1865 noted a growing tendency in Philadelphia to do away 
with the old-fashioned market sheds in the middle of the streets, and 
to build private market houses of the enclosed sort in the newer sections 
of the city. Since then the public markets of Philadelphia have de- 
creased in number, so that when the market committee of Boston last 
visited Philadelphia, in 1907, they found only two retail public market 
houses surviving: namely, one occupying two blocks on North Second 
Street, and one occupying two blocks on South Second Street, near the 
water front in the oldest part of the city. The principal retail market 
in Philadelphia at present is owned by the Reading Railroad Company, 
and is located under the Reading Railroad Station, at the street level on 
Market Street; the space occupied is 300 feet square; the market con- 
tains 842 stalls, or " stands," as they are called locally. The market is 
much frequented, and it is said that as many as 60,000 people resort to 
it on Saturdays. One reason for its popularity is found in the fact 



1910.] HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 561 

that the Reading Railroad transports free to any point on its road any 
wares bought in the Reading terminal market. The railroad company 
has also put up a refrigerating plant, and sells cold storage to holders 
of market leases at very low rates. 

With the extension of the city territorially and the crowding out of 
dwelling houses by business blocks and warehouses in the older portions 
of the city, the public markets of New York City have declined in 
number and prosperity, particularly in the last twenty-five years. In 
the period 1902-07 four public markets were abandoned in Manhattan. 
The Fulton market and the "Washington market (with 452 stalls) still 
remain the principal Xew York provision markets, but their business 
is largely of a wholesale character. The other public markets in Xew 
York numbered seven in 1907. Extensive wholesale markets, namely, 
the Wallabout, situated on the Wallabout basin in Brooklyn, and the 
West Washington market on West Street, near the North River, are 
modern wholesale markets, occupied by two-story brick market houses 
arranged in streets and built in accordance with plans prescribed by the 
city. Opposite the West Washing-ton market is the Ganzevoort farmers' 
market. It is an open space, covering an area of 140,000 square feet. 
This is especially resorted to by farmers and market gardeners from 
Xew Jersey. Running through the market space at regular distances 
are raised walks or alleys of brick, against which the farmers and 
gardeners stand their wagons. For the use of this market a charge of 
25 cents a day per wagon is made. An open space in the Wallabout 
market is also set apart for the use of farmers and others bringing 
produce to market in wagons. 

In Washington. D. C, there are several commodious and well-built 
market houses of the modern type. In general they are much more 
airy and spacious than the Quincy market house. But the principal 
market in Washington belongs to a private company, chartered by 
Congress in 1870. This market is a two-story brick structure, 500 
feet long and 200 feet wide. It contains 666 stalls. 

In Virginia Richmond and Norfolk still maintain public retail mar- 
kets. In those cities, as well as in Baltimore and Washington, the old 
custom of going to market still obtains among housekeepers to a con- 
siderable extent, despite the growing number of retail provision stores. 
But in New York and Boston " going to market " long ago ceased to be 
customary, and the multiplication in all residential districts of provision 
dealers, greengrocers and provision stores — very frequently called 
markets — has attained large proportions. 

Doubtless the actual number of retail buyers who resort to the Boston 
market district is as great as, if not greater than, it ever was. At any 
rate, on Saturdays the market houses, both public and private, and the 
outdoor market stands in North and Blackstone streets are resorted to 
by thousands of persons who buy but small quantities and then carry 
away in their hands what thev buv. 



562 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Numerous as are the buyers in the Saturday retail market, one need 
not mingle with them long to perceive that very many are denizens of 
Boston proper. This is not to be marveled at, when one considers the 
congested population of the districts that adjoin the market district or 
are within ten minutes' walk of it, and remembers that the population 
of wards 6 and 8, amounting to 60,797 in 1905, exceeds the population 
of Boston in 1825 by 2,500 souls. 

The consumers who throng the Saturday retail markets buy not from 
producers but from middlemen, whether they buy from lessees of 
market stalls, or push-cart peddlers, or commission houses, or agents 
of the western packers turned retailers for the nonce. The wagons of 
farmers and gardeners are conspicuously absent from the streets devoted 
to the Saturday retail market. Nor are the farmers' wagons, found at the 
stands in South Market and State streets in the summer, ever thronged 
by retail buyers, which is to be expected, in view of the fact that the 
occupants of stands in those streets are not allowed to sell at retail. 
The absence from the neighborhood of the markets of farmers and 
gardeners offering their wares at retail constitutes one of the marked 
differences between the Boston public market and those of Baltimore 
and Washington. The larger and wider demands upon the wholesale 
dealers in the Boston market district and the lack of district market 
houses and spaces within the city and its suburbs, not to speak of the 
compelling force of local custom, may account for the nonexistence in 
Boston of any public places in which consumers may buy at retail 
directly from any kind of producer. 

Whatever the cause, it is a fact that in Baltimore, Washington and 
Richmond, and possibly in New Orleans, the public markets have de- 
parted less widely from their original purpose, and afford retail buyers 
better facilities than in Boston for securing fresh fruit and vegetables 
in their season from actual growers. 

When the market committee of the Boston city government visited 
Baltimore, in 1902, they formed the opinion that the patronage and 
popularity of the Baltimore public markets was on the decline, owing 
to the growth of the city. Nevertheless, the Baltimore district free 
markets continue to hold their own. Since the fire the city of Baltimore 
has built a wholesale produce market house, a wholesale fish market 
hall and a new retail market house near the site of the old Centre 
market. In the interval 1901-07 the total income of the Baltimore retail 
markets (the Centre market not being taken into account) increased 
from $54,069.76 to $58,031.30. In that period the amount received 
from " per diems," i.e., fees for daily stands, mostly occupied by 
farmers and gardeners, increased from $17,828.50 in 1901 to $21,349.05 
in 1907, or 19.75 per cent. Moreover, of the total increase, $3,961.54, the 
increase of $3,520.55 in " per diems " amounted to 88.86 per cent., 
which indicates no serious diminution of the retail dealers in the Balti- 
more markets, to say the least. In seven out of the ten retail markets 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 563 

of Baltimore the receipts for 1907 showed an increase over 1901, while 
all but one showed an increase in the receipts for " per diems " in 1907 
over 1901. 

It is somewhat difficult to say how far the public market established 
by law in Boston in 1633 became what the General Court meant it to be, 
in the century that elapsed before the town voted in 1734 to have three 
markets. 

It is certain, however, that the business of Boston, as represented by 
its moneyed interests, remains to-day centered about the old market 
place at the head of State Street, where it has always been since the 
days when Captain Keayne was the chief money lender of the town. 
The seat of the selectmen shifted somewhat in the period 1630-1821. 
From 1657 to 1742 it was in the old market place. It was fixed at 
Faneuil Hall, in the new market house and Town Hall, from 1742 to 
1822. The Old State House was again the seat of government from 
1830 to 1841, since which time it has been in City Hall on School 
Street, scarcely more than a pistol shot away from the original market 
stead. Since 1734 the center of the produce business of Boston has 
remained near the site of the old town dock. 

The attempt of the founders of Boston to establish a public market 
appears to have been an attempt by the men of influence and substance 
to establish a market of the conventional type then prevalent in their 
old home; that is to say, a market planned in harmony with mediaeval 
conceptions, to be regulated, according to mediaeval and feudal prin- 
ciples, mainly in the interests of the denizens of the town. But the 
ordinary run of people in Boston and the towns in its vicinity seem 
always to have been more or less opposed to an orderly and strictly 
regulated victual market. Witness the opposition of the people in 1737 
to the continuance of the three markets voted by the town in 1734; 
their unwillingness to accept a market house from Peter Faneuil in 
1740; and their insistence from time to time that the market under 
Faneuil Hall should be discontinued. Witness, too, the disinclination 
of the General Court to strengthen by legislation the hands of the 
authorities of Boston in their endeavors to prevent forestalling and 
regrating, except in times of dearth and distress; and its willingness 
as late as 1859 to enact a statute, which is still in force, forbidding 
Boston to make any " by-law, ordinance or regulation " excluding pro- 
ducers or their agents from doing a wholesale business in the street 
stands within the market limits. 

The original market place was established when there were not more 
than 300 families living within the Neck, and when the town boundaries 
enclosed hardly more than 750 acres of land. In 1742, when Faneuil 
Hall was completed, the town census showed a population of 16,382. 
By 1825 the population of Boston had increased to 58,277, of whom 
56,003 were found within the original limits of the town. In the forty 
years that elapsed between the opening of the Quincy market and the 



564 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

publication of the report of the Joint Committee on Free Markets, 
1865, the population increased to 192,318. 

In the succeeding decade Boston added greatly to its territory by 
annexation. The census of 1875 found 341,919 persons within its 
borders, 140,669 in Old Boston and 201,250 living in annexed territory. 
In 1905 the population figures had increased to 595,380 for the city, 
172,473 for Boston proper and 422,907 for annexed territory. 

Meanwhile, the population served by the market district of Boston 
had grown by leaps and bounds. The metropolitan district, i.e., the 
cities and towns embraced within 10 miles of the State House, increased 
from 595,482 in 1875 to 1,226,858 in 1905, or 106.03 per cent. ; probably 
1,500,000 now. 

In this connection the expansion in the area of the market district is 
worth noting. The original market stead was hardly % acre in extent. 
The market space in Dock Square under and around Faneuil Hall 
covered about 2% acres. The market limits prescribed by the ordinance 
of 1866, where, according to the committee of 1865, the " produce 
exchange of New England " was already located, covered but 4 acres. 
The present market limits, established by the Legislature in 1896, cover 
30.68 acres, and include real estate assessed at nearly $22,000,000 in 
1908. 

The two market houses and the district devoted to the provision busi- 
ness that has grown up around them have perforce shared in the benefits 
derived from improved facilities for transportation, which have enhanced 
the value and importance of Boston both as an entrepot and as a dis- 
tributing point. 

Even while the region about Boston sufficed as a source of supply of 
the necessaries of life, the town was relatively inaccessible to the farmers 
of Essex and Middlesex counties. Until the first bridge over the Charles 
River was built, in 1662, between little Cambridge (Brighton) and 
Muddy River (Brookline), they had to make the best of the primitive 
ferries from Charlestown and Chelsea. Until 1786, when the Charles 
River bridge between Charlestown and Boston was opened, no wagons 
from landward towns could be driven into Boston except through Rox- 
bury over the Neck. Now Boston is accessible to the countrymen by 
eleven traffic bridges, not to speak of railroad bridges whereby access 
is had to railway terminals. 

The course of events and multifarious and revolutionary changes in 
the nature and conduct of trade and industry have served to discredit 
the ancient doctrine, — that consumers should be enabled to procure the 
necessaries of life directly from producers, at prices prescribed as 
reasonable by statute or by-law enacted for the especial benefit of the 
consumers. 

Even had going to market not gone out of fashion in Boston among 
ordinary housekeepers, as it has in most American cities, the ancient 
and primitive prejudice against middlemen was bound to give way. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 565 

For more than a century it has been practically impossible for the mass 
of consumers in Boston to deal directly with the producers of most 
kinds of " perishable produce." Even before the opening of the new 
Faneuil Hall market, as the first Mayor Quincy pointed out, forestalling 
had become not only a recognized and lucrative business, but a largely 
necessary one. There is scarcely an occupant of a stall in either of the 
present market houses whose business is not chiefly wholesale in its 
nature. 

Indeed, the main business of the market since 1850, and possibly 
since 1826 or earlier, has been in the hands of those whose methods of 
business would in the old days have subjected them to reproach and 
criticism. What are now known as marketmen, wholesalers or jobbers 
within the market, as well as the provision dealers, greengrocers and 
itinerant peddlers outside it, belong to the once obnoxious classes of 
misdemeanants stigmatized as forestallers, regrators and engrossers. 

Ever since the civil war, the pastures, farms and gardens of New 
England have become increasingly inadequate to the demands of the 
Boston market, which have been augmented by the growth and spread of 
population and the progressive rise in the standard of living. Boston 
is better supplied with fruits and fresh vegetables than was possible 
before the refrigerator cars and cold-storage plants were invented. At 
the same time, the amount of certain kinds of fresh vegetables grown 
in New England and brought to the Boston market during their season 
is greater than ever before. The Boston fish market, too, is abundantly 
supplied in most lines by Boston and New England fishing vessels. 
But as regards meats and poultry, particularly meats, the Boston market 
has long derived the bulk of its supplies from the middle west, whose 
surplus until quite recently has amply sufficed for supplying the Atlan- 
tic seaboard, and even for the export of beeves and meat products to 
Europe. Rather recently, and almost without warning, eastern con- 
sumers have had to compete against consumers in the stock-raising 
and meat-packing States for their usual supply of beef, pork and 
mutton. Shortage in the west has naturally led to enhanced prices 
to consumers both in the west and east, and to a sudden awakening as 
to the number of middlemen who intervene between producers and con- 
sumers, and levy toll upon the necessaries of life at every stage of 
their passage from the producer to the consumer. The existence of 
such shortage is made evident by the tables in Appendix J, showing 
the receipts and stocks on hand of animals and meat products at the 
principal interior markets in the last three years. A sharp drop 
is very noticeable in the Eastward Trunk line movement of provisions 
from Chicago and Chicago junction points, and in the receipts of cattle 
and hogs at Boston and other eastern cities in 1909 and 1908. 

It is interesting to note that of the market towns originally established 
by the General Court in the period 1630-38 Boston is the only one in 
which the public market has ever attained much importance. None of 



566 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

the towns or cities that have been annexed to Boston since 1865 contained 
a public market house at the time of its annexation. Indeed, Salem 
appears to be the only city in Massachusetts except Boston which has 
a market house of its own at the present time. Public markets of the 
Faneuil Hall type have not developed to any considerable extent in the 
other New England States. If they ever did figure largely in local life 
they have long since ceased to develop or have passed out of existence. 

It may be noted that most of the public retail markets of the country 
existing at the present time are found within the limits of the thirteen 
original States and in Ohio and Indiana. In the middle west and the 
northwest many towns have market squares, but these squares seldom 
contain market houses. Such market houses as are found in several 
of the cities of Ohio are generally open sheds in the middle of public 
streets. Chicago has no public market. Indianapolis, however, has a 
notable collection of buildings, adjacent to a considerable market space, 
in which an extensive retail market, much resorted to, is still kept up. 

It is noteworthy that the receipts from public markets in the United 
States as a rule yield a surplus over the expenditures for maintenance, 
even though the public markets of such American cities as still have 
them are for the most part managed after traditional method, in accord- 
ance with the doctrine of laissez faire. 

Of the 158 cities in the United States having 30,000 inhabitants, 
according to the last special report of the United States Census Bureau 
for 1907, 54 made returns of market receipts and expenditures for the 
year. In 25 cities, having receipts to the amount of $10,000 and up- 
ward, total receipts from markets and public scales aggregated 
$1,252,405, or $865,237 more than the expense of maintenance. In 1903 
receipts in the same cities aggregated $1,117,291 and expenditures 
$269,079, netting a surplus of $848,212. (See table in Appendix K.) 
Boston has long derived a considerable return from its two market 
houses. 

In Boston the city government has pursued a conservative, not to say 
somewhat unprogressive, policy as regards public markets. No far- 
sighted measure or policy comparable to that which signalized the 
administration of the first Mayor Quincy has developed since 1826. 
Indeed, no American city has deliberately framed a comprehensive plan, 
much less carried one into effect, for developing public markets along 
the most approved modern lines, to meet the growing needs of an en- 
larged territory and an ever-increasing population. Such public markets 
as still exist in the larger cities on the Atlantic coast fall short of the 
" state of the art " in market administration such as exists in many 
European cities, particularly upon the continent. 

Since 1880 the city of Berlin has abolished its open weekly markets, 
and has built a series of airy and commodious district market halls 
especially adapted to their purpose, in conformity with modern rules of 
municipal hygiene and sanitation. Moreover, the Berlin authorities 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 567 

have availed themselves of the opportunity afforded by their belt line 
railway to reduce the cost of transportation of provisions in bulk. Of 
fourteen public markets in Berlin, which are conveniently located in 
different sections of the city, two are distinctively wholesale markets, 
into which freight trains are run directly on spur tracks connecting 
with the City Belt Line Railway. The course of prices, both wholesale 
and retail, is closely followed by the city authorities, and regularly 
made public for the benefit of consumers. The nearest approach in 
Boston to utilizing belt line facilities is found in a short spur track 
which runs from the Union Freight Railway into the Clinton market. 
This chiefly benefits the western beef packers who have their warehouses 
in and near the Clinton market. But the ultimate cost of provisions to 
most consumers, whether in Boston, greater Boston, the White Moun- 
tains or in Mt. Desert, is necessarily and inevitably enhanced by the 
cost of the numerous hauls and transfers of meats and vegetables from 
wharves and railroad stations to storeroom, stall and retail store, and 
thence to the consumer's residence. 

In 1868 the first market hall was opened in Berlin by a private 
company; but the venture was short-lived, because it could not compete 
with the open-air weekly markets in its vicinity. Another private com- 
pany in 1872 projected a scheme for building 12 market halls in 
different sections of the city. The scheme failed of approval by the 
authorities, who held that it would be contrary to public policy to allow 
a private corporation to control so important a matter as providing 
the necessaries of life. The question of the city's erecting district 
market halls remained in the background until 1881, when a commission 
was constituted to consider the question in all its bearings. 

Meanwhile, the city had abolished private slaughterhouses and con- 
structed a model central cattle market and abbatoir, and an admirable 
elevated City Belt Line Railway (Stadt and Ringbahn) had been 
constructed, whereby the local traffic of Berlin was brought into close 
connection with the Prussian railway system and its connections. 

The commission developed a general plan (1) for abolishing the 
traditional weekly markets and erecting modern market halls in their 
stead, and (2) for establishing a Central market hall in connection with 
the elevated City Belt Line Railway. Accordingly, the 19 weekly 
markets with 9,820 " stands " have been abolished, and the open spaces 
formerly occupied by them transformed into small parks or public 
gardens. The public market halls of Berlin, 15 in number, were con- 
structed in accordance with plans of the commission in the period 
1881-93, at a total cost (according to a statement as of March 31, 1906) 
of 27,962,780 marks; including cost of land, 14,010,274 marks, con- 
struction and furnishing, 13,824,399 marks; and inventory, 128,107 
marks. The cost of Halls I. and I. a amounted to 36.66 per cent, of 
the total cost of the 15 market halls. 

The market halls designated I.-IY. were opened in May, 1886; halls 



568 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

V.-VIIL were opened in 1889 ; and halls X.-XIV. in the succeeding three 
years. Hall I. is known as the Central market and is chiefly devoted 
to wholesale dealings. The district market dealers obtain their supplies 
from the Central market halls, into which spur tracks from the City 
Belt Line Railway run directly, enabling 60 cars to discharge their 
freight at one time. The hall is amply provided with platforms, ele- 
vators, galleries and vaults for storage, a ventilating plant, a refrige- 
rating plant, and is traversed by a wide gangway for teams. It is 
lighted by electricity. The structure is of two stories at the sides, but 
has one story 21 meters or 68.88 feet high in the central hall. Its 
dimensions are 383.76 by 325.21 feet and its area is about 13,800 
square yards. Its original cost was 5,063,717 marks, of which 2,676,686 
marks were for land. 

The Central market hall soon proved to be inadequate. The receipts 
rose from 4,477.41 tons in 1886-87 to 43,730.30 in 1891-92, when the 
receipts by rail amounted to 68.6 per cent, of the total. Accordingly, 
Hall I. a, just across the street from Hall I., was begun in 1891. In 
July, 1893, it was opened as an exclusively wholesale market. It closely 
corresponds with Hall I. as to plan and equipment. It covers an area 
of about 11,000 square yards, and cost 5,150,000 marks, of which 54.26 
per cent, were for land. In 1898 Hall XII., opened in 1892, was closed, 
owing to insufficient patronage. It originally cost 1,012,000 marks. 

On March 31, 1906, the total area of " stands " (stalls) subject to 
lease in the 14 market halls of Berlin amounted to 29,993 square meters, 
or 35,871 square yards. In the administrative year ending March 31, 
1906, the total rental from all stands amounted to 2,150,296 marks, of 
which 1,153,705 marks were from rentals in the two central halls 
(523,381 from Hall I. and 630,324 from Hall I. a). In other words, 
Halls I. and I. a, having 36.68 of the leasable space in all the halls, 
yield 53.65 per cent, of the rentals received for the total space set apart 
for stalls. In 1894 the receipts by rail at the two central markets 
amounted to 50,364 tons and shipments to 3,204 tons. By 1904 receipts 
had increased to 121,690 tons and shipments to 7,354 tons. In 1906 
receipts were 116,170 tons and shipments 4,126 tons. 

The administrative control of the Berlin market halls since 1894 has 
been in charge of a deputation, consisting of five members of the Magis- 
tracy and ten members of the City Council. The authorities of Berlin 
assert that the purposes of their market system, viz., to ensure an 
abundant, constant, diversified supply of provisions at fairly uniform 
prices, at halls so located as to be readily accessible to the inhabitants 
of the several sections of the city, have been well secured; and that the 
general result of their market policy has been to prevent undue en- 
hancement of prices to consumers who patronize the retail markets. 

The market hours established by the police department in 1893 for the 
market houses were as follows : — 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



569 



Hall I. : — 

Wholesale section, . 

Eetail section, 



Hall I. a : — 

Wholesale only, 



Halls II.-XIV. : — 

For wholesale dealings, 

For retail dealings, 



4 a.m. to 10 a.m., in winter. 

3 a.m. to 10 a.m., in summer. 
7 a.m. to 1 p.m., in winter. 
6 a.m. to 1 p.m., in summer. 

5 p.m. to 7 p.m., Mondays, Fridays 
5 p.m. to 8 p.m., Saturdays. 

4 a.m. to 10 A.M., in winter. 
3 a.m. to 10 a.m., in summer. 

5 p.m. to 7 p.m., except for meats. 



5 A.M. 


to 


1 P.M., 


in winter. 


4 A.M. 


to 


1 P.M., 


in summer. 


7 A.M. 


to 


1 P.M., 


in winter. 


6 A.M. 


to 


1 P.M., 


in summer. 


5 P.M. 


to 


7 P.M., 


Mondays, Friday 


5 P.M. 


to 


8 P.M., 


Saturdays. 



In Berlin, as in other great cities, a tendency exists for private 
markets and retail provision dealers, as well as hawkers and peddlers, 
to multiply, even in the vicinity of public markets. The increase in the 
number of such dealers has a somewhat retarding influence upon the 
patronage of the market halls in Berlin; but the following table shows 
a fairly steady increase in the rentals of the wholesale markets, together 
with a slight decline since 1902 in the rentals from the retail market 
halls : — 



Table showing the Receipts in Berlin from Market Rentals (in Marks) . 



Year. 


Total. 


Two Central 
Halls. 


Twelve Other 
Halls. 


1900-01 


2,062,655 


983,574 


1,079,081 


1901-02 






2,118,845 


1,026,569 


1,092,276 


1902-03, 






2,136,199 


1,046,447 


1,089,752 


1903-04, 






2,136,525 


1,075,436 


1,061,089 


1904-05, 






2,142,275 


1,107,762 


1,034,513 


1905-06, 






2,137,121 


1,122,286 


1,014,835 


1906-07, * 






2,150,296 


1,153,705 


996,591 



In general, the expenses for maintenance of the Berlin market halls 
are more than met by their receipts. The data available do not admit 
of a complete tabular statement, but the following statement, derived 
from official sources for certain years, is significant : — 



570 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Year. 


Receipts 
(Marks). 


Expenses 
(Marks). 


Surplus 

(Marks). 


1894-95 

1900-01, 

1901-02 

1905-06 

1906-07 


2,609,084 
3,139,340 
2,976,819 
3,430,740 
3,648,900 


2,413,920 
2,817,353 
2,553,801 
2,747,159 
2,942,843 


195,164 
321,987 
423,018 
683,081 
706,057 



At the end of the fiscal year 1906-07 the renewal and extension fund, 
derived from the surplus of annual receipts over expenditures, amounted 
to 1,302,038 marks; and the amount of debt outstanding on account of 
market halls amounted to 25,639,839 marks, against 28,715,570 marks, 
the amount originally issued for land and construction. 

Vienna and Budapest both have market systems similar to that of 
Berlin. In Vienna there is a central wholesale market connected with 
the railroad, and six district retail market halls in different sections of 
the city. In addition, Vienna still contains more than 30 open markets 
in various sections, of the traditional, weekly-market type. In Budapest 
the central market hall comprises two sections, one for wholesale and 
one for retail dealings. The central market hall is connected directly 
with the railroads, and in addition has a wharf on the bank of the 
Danube. There are besides five district retail market halls. In both 
cities the operation of the markets yields, and has yielded for years, a 
considerable surplus from receipts over expenditures for maintenance. 

It is a fair question whether the market system of Boston should not 
be modernized, in the light of the policy adopted by Berlin, Vienna and 
Budapest. In any event, the question of eliminating unnecessary hauls 
and transfers of provisions in order to reduce their cost to the retail 
dealers and the ultimate consumers demands careful consideration and 
study. The present method of transporting provisions in bulk from 
the railway terminals and the wharves to the storage rooms of the com- 
mission houses and the jobbers (except for the comparatively slight 
benefit derived from the spur tracks of the Union Freight Railway, 
which run into the Clinton market) is decidedly antiquated and inade- 
quate. Any scheme for the improvement of belt line transportation 
facilities in Boston, such as was proposed by the Metropolitan District 
Improvement Commission, will be insufficient unless its relation to the 
market district is carefully and candidly considered. It seems clear that 
the several sections comprised in the city of Boston and greater Boston 
might be greatly benefited if a well-considered system of district retail 
market halls, conveniently located and constructed in accordance with 
the present state of the art, were established. 



1910.1 HOUSE — No. 1750. 571 



Appendix B. 



FAMILY BUDGETS. 



[Report prepared for the Massachusetts Commission on the Cost of Living by Mr. D. H. Howie. 



Introduction. 

The time allowed for this investigation was so brief that it has been 
impossible to collect any original data. The writer has studied all previ- 
ous investigations of family budgets that are available, procured un- 
published material wherever possible, and interviewed a number of 
people who have practical knowledge of the subject. 

This report is divided into four parts: Part 1, A Comparative 
Presentation of Various Studies of Family Budgets in Massachusetts 
from 1874 to 1901; Part 2, A Comparative Presentation of Various 
Studies of Family Budgets in the United States and Europe; Part 3, 
A Brief Review of the Investigation of the Standard of Living in New 
York (made under the auspices of the State Conference of Charities, in 
1907) ; Part 4, A Presentation of the Budgets of Families in Boston, 
in detail, for one week in 1909 (data hitherto unpublished). 

These different parts bear no relation to each other, and are really 
four distinct studies. 

Part 1. — Family Budgets in Massachusetts, 1874-1901. 
A detailed study of family budgets should form an important part of 
any thoroughgoing inquiry into the increasing cost of living. The 
operation of certain economic tendencies, such as increasing wages, 
increasing production of gold, the effect of the tariff upon prices, etc., 
can be isolated and studied with a considerable degree of definiteness; 
then the broad effects of the play of these tendencies upon the life of the 
nation or community can be estimated. But in order to register the 
actual effects of . these tendencies upon living conditions, with any 
approach to accuracy, something more than speculation is required. An 
intimate study of the living conditions of individual families would 
give a concrete demonstration of the way in which the effects of these 
economic tendencies are interacting within the family group, and how 
these changes in the economic basis of life are affecting the welfare of 



572 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

men, women and children in the elementary unit of society. We want 
to know the effect of the increasing cost of living upon the welfare of 
the people of the State. A study of the living conditions as shown by 
the family budgets would be necessary for any detailed account of that 
effect. 

The best way of ascertaining the effect of the increasing cost of 
living upon human welfare in Massachusetts would be to take a num- 
ber of families, carefully selected, so as to be representative of the 
various groups and classes in the community, and in such numbers 
that the effects of individual peculiarities would be minimized. If the 
investigation could cover the budgets of these families for a period 
of years, with adequate knowledge of the history of the family in the 
mean time, so that the effect of changes within the family upon ex- 
penditures could be allowed for, we should get a concrete picture of 
the effect of changing economic conditions upon the plan of living, 
and, if our study were sufficiently intimate, of the effect upon the 
standard of living. Our units would be the same, and we should have 
those families in any single study all from one locality, so that we 
might be sure we were considering the same economic tendencies. For 
instance, consider rents. Rents may be increasing in one locality over 
a period of years, decreasing in another, and remain practically un- 
changed in a third community. It would be difficult to get accurate 
conclusions as to the effect of changes in rents by lumping together 
the budgets from all three localities in our averages. The difficulties 
in the way of such a study as I have outlined are enormous, and so 
far as I know it has never been attempted. 

Studies of family budgets have been made from time to time in 
Massachusetts. It is difficult to compare them, because the units are 
in no case the same, but are different for every investigation. Another 
difficulty lies in the fact that the basis of selection has not always 
been the same. As conclusions of general application are drawn from 
a relatively small number of cases, it is important that these budgets 
be selected upon the same basis. As a matter of fact, these budgets 
were collected for different purposes, and the basis of selection was 
by no means the same in every investigation. In some cases the num- 
ber of budgets may seem too small to offer any definite conclusions. 
The importance of selection in the study of family budgets has been 
well emphasized by Prof. F. H. Giddings, in his introduction to Mrs. 
More's book on " Wage Earners Budgets : " — 

The results are at best representative, possibly only indicative, of the 
social economy of wage earners. Their value turns entirely upon the scien- 
tific validity of the selection made. Nothing is easier than to choose from a 
given population so many hundreds or so many thousands of individuals or 
of families, whose circumstances, duly set down in arithmetical terms, shall 
constitute a picture of economic life thoroughly biased and misleading. 
Thrift can be demonstrated, or the existing social order can be indicted 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 573 

for infamous cruelty to any extent desired, by the method of statistical 
selection. "When, therefore, an inquiry, instead of covering all possible in- 
stances in a given population, is necessarily and confessedly based upon 
selected units, it is imperative from the standpoints alike or science and of 
common honesty that the selections shall be made by a strictly objective 
test, and that the nature of the test shall be explicitly made known to all 
■who read and venture to use the results. 

The question may be raised whether it is safe to base any general 
conclusions upon such studies, because families differ so in their habits 
and ideals of life. It is common observation that the amount of money 
inadequate for one family may be adequate for another family of the 
same size and in similar circumstances. However, in the case of physi- 
cal necessities, as is true of practically all the families included in these 
investigations, a comparatively small number of cases will suffice to 
indicate the main features of the apportionment of those expenditures 
that are dictated by circumstances. 

The first study of family budgets in Massachusetts was made in 
1874, and published as Part 4 of the report of the State Bureau 
of Statistics of Labor in 1875, under the title " Conditions of Work- 
ingmen's Families." Family budgets to the number of 397 were 
collected in different parts of the State for this investigation; 27 
budgets were from Boston, but they are not separated from the rest. 
Tables 1, 2 and 3 present the results that are pertinent to this inquiry. 
Table 1 shows the average relative surplus or deficit for graduated 
incomes, with the number of families in each income group. It should 
be said at the start that it is always of the greatest importance that 
the tables show the number of families upon which the figures are 
based. This will allow the reader to judge for himself as to how much 
weight is to be given to the averages. It will be observed that there 
is no surplus until the $600-$700 group is reached; after that it in- 
creases gradually up to the $1,100-$1,200 group, where it increases 
very suddenly. This table shows, according to the original report, that 
the recipient of an income of less than $600 must get into debt. 

Table 2 gives the percentages of expenditure as regards income 
groups. It is to be noted that in the lowest income group, $300-$450 
a year, subsistence and rent take 84 per cent, of all expenditures. The 
percentage of expenditure for these purposes gradually decreases with 
increasing income, while the percentage for clothing and sundries in- 
creases and fuel remains with about the same percentage. 

Table 3 presents the average income from the whole number of 
families and the average expenditure for various purposes, by amounts 
and percentages. General averages of this kind are of doubtful value, 
either in picturing actual conditions or for comparison with each other. 
Their value depends entirely upon the proportion of the total number 
of families that falls into the various income groups, and the way 
in which this proportion corresponds to that of the relative sizes of 



574 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

these groups in the community. This proportion usually varies con- 
siderably in different investigations. I shall refer to this point again 
in discussing Table 13. The best method of comparisons is by income 
groups, because there are thousands of families within those groups 
for whom our conclusions may be approximately correct, whereas an 
average may often be " loaded," or lie between such distant extremes 
as to be of no practical value. 

The next study in Massachusetts was made in 1883, and published 
in Part 4 of the report of the Bureau of Statistics of Labor for 1884, 
under the title " Comparative Prices and the Cost of Living, 1860-83," 
for Massachusetts and Great Britain. There are 19 budgets for Massa- 
chusetts. Tables 4, 5 and 6 are from that investigation. Table 4 
shows the number of families in each income group, in order that 
we may see how the average is weighted, as I have just explained. 
Table 5 gives the expenditures of the average family, by amounts and 
percentages. The average is $754.42, or about $8 lower than the 
average for 1874. Table 6 presents a comparison of the expenditure 
of the average family in 1874 and in 1883, by percentages. This 
comparison is interesting because the averages are so nearly alike. 
There is a smaller percentage spent for food in 1883, even though the 
income is a little smaller. The percentage spent for sundries shows 
a marked increase, rent a slight increase and fuel a decrease. A knowl- 
edge of the laws derived from the study of many budgets to be dis- 
cussed in Part 2 would lead one to infer from Table 6 that prices 
were lower in 1883 than in 1874. It is generally true, as will be shown 
later, that an increase of income is accompanied by a decreasing per- 
centage of expenditure for food, and the percentage of expenditure 
for food may be taken as an index of the well-being of a family. The 
percentage of income expended for sundries increases with increasing 
income. The figures for 1883 accordingly show every sign of a larger 
income than those for 1874, but, inasmuch as the actual amount is 
less, the only explanation would be that the income was really greater 
because prices were lower. The number of families from which the 
figures for 1883 were obtained was relatively few, and probably would 
not warrant us in placing too much reliance upon these figures. 

The next budgets collected in Massachusetts were for the seventh 
annual report of the Commissioner of Labor, on the " Cost of Pro- 
duction in the Textile and Glass Industries of the United States," 
published in 1891. The cost of living of the wage earner was con- 
sidered as a factor in the cost of production. There were 5,284 budgets 
in the investigation, of which 418 were for Massachusetts families. 
Tables 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 are from that investigation. Table 7 gives 
the average expenditure of 191 normal Massachusetts families, by 
graduated income groups. A normal family is thus defined : — 

By a normal family is meant one with the following attributes: It has 
do boarders or dependents. It does not own its dwelling place. It has an 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 575 

expenditure given for rent, fuel, lighting, clothing and food. It has both 
a husband and a wife. It has not more than five children, no one of whom 
is over fourteen years of age. 

The percentage of expenditure for food shows a decrease with in- 
creasing income. Rent remains practically stationary after the first 
two groups, which are so small as to be abnormal; the percentages for 
clothing and sundries show a steady increase. Fuel and lighting re- 
main about the same throughout. 

Table 8 gives the average expenditure per family, by amounts and 
percentages. Table 9 gives the average income for 418 Massachusetts 
families and the average expenditures, with sundries given in detail, 
and the number of families having the expenditure. The items of 
income and expenditure per family shown in this table do not repre- 
sent in every case the average for the total families shown, but the 
average for the number of families having the kind of expenditure 
specified. Table 10 gives a comparison of average expenditure per 
family, by percentages and income groups, for the years 1891 and 
1874. This comparison is rendered rather difficult, because the incomes 
are classified differently. The conclusion from this table, if we knew 
no other facts about the matter, would be that prices were lower in 
1891 than in 1874, as the percentage of expenditures for food is much 
lower in 1891 in every income group. Table 11 compares the average 
expenditure per family for all incomes for 1874, 1883 and 1891, by 
amounts. As the total income for 1891 is about $200 less than that 
for either of the other years, not much is to be gained from the com- 
parison except the observation that the average is differently weighted. 

The next collection of family budgets in Massachusetts was made in 
1901 by the Bureau of Statistics of Labor, and published in the annual 
report for 1901 as Part 3, " Prices and the Cost of Living." There 
were 152 budgets in this study. Tables 12, 13, 14 and 15 are based 
upon this investigation. Table 12 gives the average expenditures of 
these families, by amounts and percentages and by graduated income 
groups. This table is interesting because of the very slight variation 
in the percentages in the different income groups. The percentage 
expended for food decreases but slightly; rent shows a surprising de- 
crease; clothing and sundries show an increase, as we would expect. 
Table 13 shows the average expenditure per family, by amounts and 
percentages, for all incomes. This average is $846.83, about $100 
more than the highest average that has yet appeared. This is due to 
the fact that 94 out of 152 families are in the two highest income 
groups. Table 14 gives a comparison of expenditures per family, by 
percentages and income groups, for 1874, 1890 and 1901. A study 
of this table would indicate that prices in 1901 were much higher than 
in 1890, but not so high as in 1874. 

Table 15 gives a comparison of the expenditure of the average fam- 



576 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

ily income, by amounts per family, for 1901, 1890, 1883 and 1874; 
it will be observed that the expenditure for food in 1901 is very 
large, constituting more than 50 per cent, of the total. This, taken 
with the high average, might be taken to mean that prices were high, 
if these were the only facts known. 

The next and last collection of Massachusetts family budgets that 
has been made was published in the report of the United States Com- 
missioner of Labor for 1903, on the " Cost of Living and Retail Prices 
of Food." This report was based upon 25,440 budgets, of which 2,577 
were from Massachusetts. The material for this report was really 
collected in 1901, but is here marked 1903, to distinguish it from the 
investigation of the State Bureau of Statistics of Labor in 1901. Tables 
16-22 are based upon this investigation. 

Table 16 gives the average expenditures of 1,189 normal families in 
Massachusetts, by graduated incomes and amounts. Table 17 gives 
the average expenditure per normal family for all incomes, by amounts 
and percentages. This average is $631.71, about $100 more than for 
a " normal " family in 1891. Taking the percentage of expenditure 
for food as the index of prosperity, the average family would appear 
to be fairly comfortable. But this average is very much lower than 
urban conditions would permit, as is shown by the single item of rent. 
The average expenditure for rent given here is $132.32, or about $2.60 
a week. This would be decidedly low as an average for cities in 
Massachusetts. 

Table 18 gives in great detail the average expenditures for purposes 
other than food of 253 families in Massachusetts. 

Table 19 gives an analysis of the average expenditures for food for 
253 families in Massachusetts. 

Table 20 compares the average expenditure per family, by amounts 
and classified incomes, for 1903 and 1901. As these two investigations 
were made in the same year, it will be interesting to note the sur- 
prising differences in the same groups, although the comparison is 
different because of the different classification of incomes. 

Tables 21 and 22 give the average expenditures per family for all 
incomes, by amounts (Table 21) and by percentages (Table 22). 

It has not been possible to obtain many budgets covering a 
period of years. There are two, however, that may be interesting. 
The first budget is that of a Boston family for the years 1885 and 
1907, presented in Tables 23-25. The increases in the expenditures 
for food and clothing are most marked, even though the number in 
the family is less in 1907. The second budget, presented in Table 26, 
is that of the family of a foreman in a small Massachusetts manu- 
facturing town, for various years between 1898 and 1909. The great 
increase in the cost of food in 1906 and 1909 is most noticeable. 

There seems to be a great variety of opinion as to the effect of the 
increased cost of living upon family budgets, and surprisingly little 
definite material. The opinion seems to be general that rents have 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



577 



increased but little in Boston and vicinity, and that food and clothing 
have materially increased. The wages of unskilled laborers, of whom 
there are many, have not increased much in the last fifteen years, and 
the result has been that the increasing cost of food, clothing and fuel 
has meant a reduction in the amount spent for food. This has pro- 
duced physical deterioration and ill health. Families that have been 
able to save a little in the past are no longer able to do so. There 
has been an increase in borrowing money and in buying upon the 
instalment plan. 

The Canadian Royal Commissioners on the Civil Service of Canada, 
in a report on the "Cost of Living in Canada" (pp. 59-62), have 
compared the average expenditures of families of varying incomes 
in 1897 and 1907. In the case of a family of five, with an income of 
$750 a year, spending in the neighborhood of $10 a week for food, 
lighting and rent, the expenditures for these three items are given 
as $9.06 in 1897 and $12.17 in 1907. Their conclusion is: The above 
showing warrants the general conclusion that for families living in 
Ottawa, on incomes varying from $600 to $900 per year, the rate of 
advance in the decade lies between 30 and 35 per cent. The second 
budget presented represents the average expenditures for a month of 
a family with an income rising $2,000 a year. The advance in the 
decade is estimated at 28 per cent. Typical expenditures for neces- 
saries for a month by a family of five, living on a salary of $1,200, 
reckoned at 1897 and 1907 prices, are presented in Table 27. The 
increase shown is approximately 30 per cent. The prices of 1897 left 
a margin of $22.50 per month for insurance, recreation, medicine, 
education, superannuation, church contributions, water rates and other 
sundries. These have to be met to-day by reductions on the primary 
necessities. 

This estimate of 30 per cent, increase for Ottawa is higher than any 
that the writer has heard in Boston. 

Family Budgets in Massachusetts, 1874. 
Table 1. — Graduation of Income and Relative Surplus. 



Income. 



Number Average I 
o£ I Surplus 
Fami- j or 
lies. i Deficit. 



Income. 



Number 
of 
Fami- 
lies. 



Average 
Surplus 

or 
Deficit. 



$300- $400, 






3 


— $33.10 


$1,000-$1,100, . 


16 


$49.51 


400- 500, 






7 


—8.43 


1,100- 1,200, . 


4 


105.80 


500- 600, 






48 


—5.13 


1,200- 1,300, . 


4 


129.35 


600- 700, 






92 


9.86 


1,300- 1,400, . 


2 


172.00 


700- 800, 






110 


20.25 


1.500- 1,600, . 


1 


228.75 


800- 900, 






71 


32.48 


Above 1,800, . 


1 


275.80 


900-1,000, 






38 


57.77 









578 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Table 2. — Percentage of Expenditure, by Income Groups. 1 





Income. 


ITEMS OF EXPENDI- 
TURE. 


$300- $450. 


$450- $600. 


$600-$750. 


$750-$l,200. 


$1,200 and 

Over. 


Subsistence, .... 

Clothing, 

Rent, 

Fuel, 

Sundries, 


64 
7 

20 
6 
3 


63.0 
10.5 
15.5 
6.0 
5.0 


60 
14 
14 
6 
6 


56 
15 
17 
6 
6 


51 
19 
15 
5 
10 



1 Report Massachusetts Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1875. 

Table 3. — Average Income of All Families, $762.72. 



Items of 
expendituee. 


Average 
Amount 
of Ex- 
penditure. 


Average 
Percentage 

of Ex- 
penditure. 


Items of 
expendituhe. 


Average 
Amount 
of Ex- 
penditure. 


Average 
Percentage 

of Ex- 
penditure. 


Subsistence, 
Clothing, . 
Rent, 


$449.58 
106.68 
111.30 


59 
14 
15 


Fuel, 
Sundries, . 


$45.72 
45.72 


6 
6 



Family Budgets in Massachusetts, 1883. 
Table 4. — Number of Families in each Income Group. 



Income. 


Number 

of 
Families. 


Income. 


Number 

of 
Families. 


$600-$700 

700-800, 

800-900 


7 
3 
4 


$900-$1,000, 

1,000 and over, .... 


2 
3 



Table 5. — Average Income of All Families, $75^42. 



Items of 
Expenditure. 


Average 
Amount 

of Ex- 
penditure. 


Average 
Percentage 

of Ex- 
penditure. 


Items of 
Expenditure. 


Average 
Amount 

of Ex- 
penditure. 


Average 
Percentage 

of Ex- 
penditure. 


Rent, 


$148.95 


19.75 


Fuel, 


$32.42 


4.30 


Groceries, 


222.68 


29.52 


Clothing, . 


77.89 


10.32 


Meat, 


100.63 


13.34 


Boots and shoes, 


27.37 


3.63 


Fish, 


25.00 . 


3.31 


Dry goods, 


15.11 


2.00 


Milk, 


23.42 


3.11 


Sundries, . 


80.95 


10.73 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



579 



Table 6. — Expenditure of Average Income, by Percentages, 1888 and 



1874. Total Income, 1883, $754-42; 1874, $762.72. 




Items of Expenditure. 


1883. 


1874. 


Items of Expenditure. 


1883. 


1874. 


Subsistence, 

Clothing, .... 

Rent 


49.28 
15.95 
19.74 


56.00 
15.00 
17.00 


Fuel 

Sundries, .... 


4.30 
10.73 


6.00 
6.00 



Family Budgets in Massachusetts, 1891. 

Table 7. — Percentage of Expenditure of 191 Normal Families employed 
in Cotton and Woolen Industries, by Income Groups. 



Income. 


Number 
of 
Fami- 
lies. 


Rent. 


Fuel. 


Light. 


Clothing. 


Food. 


Sundries. 


$100- $200, 


1 


23.08 


7.18 


1.54 


3.08 


62.56 


2.56 


200- 300, 






3 


22.68 


9.54 


1.24 


9.21 


45.75 


11.58 


300- 400, 






31 


16.83 


8.01 


1.23 


9.63 


49.57 


14.73 


400- 500, 






55 


15.71 


6.93 


1.22 


11.99 


46.80 


17.35 


500- 600, 






46 


14.93 


6.76 


1.22 


14.02 


44.61 


18.46 


600- 700, 






30 


14.71 


5.50 


1.13 


14.68 


40.15 


23.83 


700- 800, 






10 


14.19 


4.74 


.83 


17.31 


36.87 


26.06 


800- 900, 






6 


15.09 


5.32 


1.51 


18.86 


38.63 


20.59 


900-1,000, 






7 


15.57 


6.64 


1.24 


16.30 


44.77 


15.48 


1,000-1,100, 






2 


14.80 


5.64 


1.65 


21.48 


38.49 


17.94 


All incomes, 






191 


15.38 


6.52 


1.20 


13.68 


44.12 


19.10 



Table 8. — Average Income of 191 Normal Families, $534-19. 



Items of 
Expenditure. 



Rent, 
Fuel, 

Light, 



Average 
Amount 

of Ex- 
penditure. 



$78.01 

33.07 

6.09 



Average 
Percentage 

of Ex- 
penditure. 



15.38 
6.52 
1.20 



Items of 
Expenditure. 



Clothing, 

Food, 

Sundries, 



Average 
Amount 
of Ex- 
penditure. 



$69.35 

223.71 

96.84 



Average 
Percentage 

of Ex- 
penditure. 



13.68 
44.12 
19.10 



580 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Table 9. - 


- Average Income of Jf.18 Families, $705.27. 




Items of Expendi- 
ture. 


Average 
Amount 

of 
Expendi- 
ture. 


Number 
of 
Fami- 
lies. 


Items of Expendi- 
ture. 


Average 
Amount 

of 
Expendi- 
ture. 


Number 
of 
Fami- 
lies. 


Rent, .... 


$83.20 


418 


Religion, 


$11.30 


355 


Food, .... 


301.76 


418 


Charity, 


2.41 


207 


Fuel 


37.33 


417 


Furniture, 


25.84 


371 


Light, .... 


6.33 


415 


Books and newspapers,. 


6.61 


345 


Clothing, 


100.70 


415 


Amusements, vacations, 


11.20 


218 


Taxes 


4.75 


307 


Liquors, 


20.28 


171 


Insurance, life, 


19.28 


188 


Tobacco, 


9.51 


296 


Insurance, property, 


6.42 


28 


Sickness, death, 


22.32 


350 


Organizations, 


13.13 


219 


Other purposes, . 


39.79 


392 



Families having surplus, 209; average, $145.07. Families having deficits, 136; average, $48.28. 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



581 





Z 






















§ 






C3 


s 


o 


. 


o 


1 




( 


o 


! 


! 








oo 


CO 




U5 








CO 






CO 






Q tfi 


"■* 


























2g 




















































n 


»H 


§ 






00 
CO 


o 

00 


CO 

oo 




OS 

o 


00 




3 




o 


OO 


CO 










es 




CM 


kO 




© 




J 












CM 


CM 










~ 


































ct 


o 




O 








o 






o 








JO 














o 






CO 










co 




CO 








CO 






U3 






o 




























o 


































o 




_l 


«o 


r~ 




CO 


t-- 




OS 








*a 


O0 




CO 


■"* 


00 






t^. 




•^< 






oo 




vr 




-<*« 


o 


CO 




00 


•**> 




oo 










"* 




■*f 


•^ 


CO 






■f 




CO 


CO 




























« 

H 




21 


o 




US 








o 






o 




o 


So 


t^ 




© 








_,, 






lO 




Z 


** 














^ 






*-' 




Q 
2 


s 

O 




























CO 


OS 




CM 


oo 






CO 


o 






a. 


5> 










CO 


CO 






CO 


' 




X 




00 




_* 




•<* 




t^. 










_( 


W 








" 




*- 














<M 






s 


o 

o 




s 








o 
o 






3 

o 








00 










































































































































_l 










•**< 






tP 










en 

00 


o 


a> 






»rt 


r- 




CO 


CO 




CD 






00 


co 




CO 


o 


•«* 




«o 


CO 




US 








f. 




o 






















S 


o 




"3 








o 






3 


1 






00 


o 




U0 








■"* 






r~ 










<n 
























z 

« 






















































CO 


_ i 




CO 


_l 


© 




— 


t^ 












00 


^ 






t^ 


~* 






»o 




00 






00 


c© 


>c 




•*J< 


21 


•<# 




«o 


m 




23 














1 


1 


I 














t- 




























c 


5 


























c 

1 

[ 


4 

i 

3 


























t 


3 


© 

M 

o 




© 

o 

CO 

o 








o" 


1 


1 


© 

o 

<M_ 


1 


a 


















o 










- 








•» 




•>* 








CO 






t~ 






























2 






























5 

a 


C 
t 

i 


> 
« 

% 

3 
5 

5 






























o 
o 


8 




s 


o 
o 


o 
— 




o 


o 

s 




s 








s 


lO 






t- 


-r. 










* 








A 






A 




4 




A 


A 




A 










o 




o 


3 


o 




--Z 






8 


































«» 























CO 



05 

s 

65 



OS OO t^ 



582 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



s 4 



CO 

s- 

I 






1 


a 






o 




CM 




CO 


OS 




t^ 


""H 




O 


«* 


00 


H 


LO 


CO 
















H 














K 


Ph 












a 


























K 














t> 


a 
d 

O 


c© 


ec 


OS 


t^ 


»o 






r~ 


LO 


lO 




co 


oa 




CO 


o 










CO 






&& 








CM 




< 














d 














CO 


cr. 


t^ 


CO 


•* 




O 


X^ 


CO 


CO 


io 


>* 










































to 


d 
o 








CN 


,_, 




CM 


CM 


■* 


00 


CO 




O 






(^ 






CO 
6© 






"* 


lO 




< 














"S 


CO 




t- 


CO 








us 


CM 




00 




o 


T-H 


t~ 


t~ 


,_| 


CO 




a) 


CM 










H 

fc 












Ph 














c 

o 


O 


o 


CO 




CM 




o 


»H 


OS 


t^ 


»H 




Tfl 


t^. 




1^. 






00 


co 




os 
















1. 


«1 














CI 


lO 


CO 


00 


CO 


CM 




1—1 


CO 


CO 


CD 


CO 




o 


CO 


_. 


,_! 


m 


■>* 


o 


m 












^ 














Ph 
























o 


d 
d 
o 


o 






CM 


CM 


O 




t^ 


■^ 


CO 


•-H 




*# 
















CM 


















< 














d 


g 


CO 


o 




^ 




co 


co 




OO 




o 


CO 


— 




CO 






1h 

o 
Ph 


us 


»o 


us 


us 


lO 




o 
o 
























N 


"a 

o 

2 


00 


,_| 


co 


US 


CO 




, — ' 




r_l 


"tf 


1—1 




,JH 




t» 


_ 


t^ 








CO 








CM 








CO 




< 






































55 £ 








Tf 


o 




CM 




l>- 


CM 


W 












§ 












O 












o 












z 












HH 










> 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




s 


CO 


US 


CM 


t3 

c 
















0> 

-a 
a 


i 


<L 


<± 


B 
















t= 


ee 






,-T 1 





i V 






(g"SS 






« «•- 


CO »o 




ft M*rt 


•>* CD 
lO CO 




gs& 










> o X 






«< H 












a 






d a> 






o b 






S 5 

© o a 


CM CO 

CO CO 




CO io 




os a 






a x 






£ H 






<J 






H 




en 


K 




00 


P 




CO 






vr- 






o<? 


H 




fc© 






to 


H 




<» 
























s 


CO 




,« 


H 




^ 


tH 




<5> 




« 


*o 




g 


■»— 1 




— 


> 




73 73 

o d 






O 3 


<a 




P=H 02 


S 










o 






«o 


i oi 




S 










CO 00 i-t 


CO 


Sirs 


Tf CO 00 
CM US CM 


£ 


jga 


~H ^H 




> o X 




55 


< H 




1 






1 


CI 






3 © 










CO 


I 5 

4) © d 






CM —l ■* 


H 


IO 00 00 
O Tt< O 


tl 


if a 


s% 


m 








< 






H 






« 













En 



















Z 






H 






ft 






K 






H 






fe 






o 












S 






H 


-^ 




H 


-d 






d d 






Rent, 
Fuel a 
Cloth 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



583 





















o 


















o 






































2 










CO 






CO 








8. 




































HS 


00 


OS 






7 a 


s 


o 


US 


CO 


oo 


X 




t^ 




1 




•< « 












CO 


CM 


US 


OS 






= 










CM 


CM 


(M 


TH 


"- 1 










t^ 


o 






•* 




CM 




H 


o 


CS 
















1-1 




- 




' 




_l 






US 




OS 






TH 








*""' 






" H 




'" H 




t- 
00 


o 
o 




o 

o 


o 
o 






g 
















o 






CO 










rH 


co 




CO 


o 














t^ 


O 


CO 


US 


b- 


co 


^ 


OS 






5 


OS 

oo 


us 


00 




'- 1 






t— 


Tt< 






OS 


CO 


■^ 


o 


CO 


O0 


•^ 


00 






&. 


rt 


"* 


"* 


"* 


■* 


w 


CO 


"* 












OS 


© 






00 




^ 






o 
o 


o 




00 


00 






>— 1 










CO 


' 


Tf 


CO 


' 


' 


CO 


' 


■<# 






*"• 


us 




US 


US 










us 










































































H 




00 


t^ 




o 


■»*< 






us 






























t> 


o 












































2 








CM 




,-H 










- 


w 




CO 


OS 


o 


CO 


°? 


oo 


CO 


•* 


1 


2 




00 










f^ 


00 


CO 






H 




















CM 






























o 




















CM 




g 




. 


CO 


CO 




. 


CO 




CO 






a> 
























•"" 






^ 


* H 










rt 






r. 






















00 


o 




— 


— 






© 










-~ 




CO 


CO 






CO 








_ 


CO 


CO 


o 


■^ 


CM 


■* 


_ 






5 






os 


l^ 


us 


f~ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


1 








00 


CO 


CO 


us 




US 


CO 


us 






5- 
























_ 




,^ 


















o 


OS 




OS 








CO 










f~ 




CO 


co 






us 




"*< 




























00 


o 




us 


a 






c 










o 




US 


•* 






t~- 




' 






*"* 


<M 




— 


*"■ 






M 










,_, 




^ 


o 


— 










2 


s 


00 


t^ 


OS 


t~ 


1-1 






X 






a 

s 


CO 


us 


s 


■^ 


-r 


US 


US 


-*■ 










^ 


r _ 
















o 


OS 




US 


CM 






o 




00 






,_! 




t^ 


l"~ 






_ 










rt 


CM 




1-1 


1-1 






rt 
















































































i 
| 


D 

s 

3 


O 

us 
w 




o 
c 

CO 

A 








8 

CM_ 








C 


3 


o 




US 








US 






















































c 


> 






















s 




















1 


w 




i 




















c 
o 
2 





3* 


o 


o 


s 


s 


s 


s 


s 


© 




i 


1 




US 

§ 


CO 

© 

— 




X 

© 

o 


OS 

o 

o 


o 

2 


© 

c 


1 








co 






CO 


















W 






























































u 
























© 




g 


> 


















o 






























3 
5 






o 








© 




-c 






















c 




j 


s 

© 




© 


t^ 






2 




o 




5 














US 




CM 
































P 




'X.' 















oo 



3 



584 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Cb 






* 

































as 




OS 


W 


« 


t> 


CO 


t- 




to 






CM 










CO 






CO 


-d 




00 


_ 


-V 


OS 


<* 


Ol 


w 


o 


to 


a 


■* 


kO 








UO 






co 


























GO 
























o 




o 


CS 




Ol 




eo 


I>- 




TJ 


to 


cm 




U5 


OO 


UO 


CO 




CN 


CN 


1 


CD 


r^ 


OS 


CO 


eo 


as 




t« 


l> 


t^ 
















uO 






e& 


O] 






CM 




CM 


CO 


CM 


CO 


3 






















CO 


Htf 


eo 


CO 


m 


00 


io 


oo 




00 


H-=> 
O 




,_( 


» r 












. 




3K 


CO 


eo 




OS 


o 


o 


CN 


o 


CN 




















O 
































§ 






s 


OS 






a> 


o 


O 


tH 


US 


CM 


eo 


"* 


bS 


CO 


CO 


^_ 


t» 


oc 


c^ 


o 


<* 


■^ 


lO 


3 
























i> 






CS 




OS 




OS 


«# 


CO 


1 


Tj< 


CO 


OS 


OS 


CN 






lO 


»rt 


lO 




,H 


Ol 


CM 


CO 


-r 


■-i 


o 


OS 


CO 


P=i 


e© 


CM 


N 


CN 






cn 


CO 




CO 






s 


















fl 


oo 


OS 


O 


CO 




CJ 


~ 


o 


o 


S 




















ft 


a: 


O 




■>* 


LO 


eo 


OS 


CM 
CN 


CO 

cm 


«« 






















O ro 
























t^ 


o 


CO 


o 


S 


CN 


OS 


OS 


CO 


CO 
























fiS 






CM 


CO 


CO 












1* 






















H 






















S 






















O 






















o 






















Z 










































> 




o 


o 


s 


o 


o 


•O 


O 


s 


o 

o 






€© 


"5 


CO 


r- 


oo 


OS 




1 




a 




i 


<± 


1 

o 


o 


& 


o 


o 


o 

o 


a 

a 


o 
o 




8 


«* 


m 


CO 


t- 








■■"i 


^"L 
















■- 1 


1—1 


*-< 



SN 





3 




-fS 






OS 


e 




co 




CO 




O 


03 


^ 


1-5 






.5? 



















ft °B 










CN 


o 




m 














ogfl 




"# 


CM 


> « x 








^ H 
















fl 








3 <U 








O «3 








S -2 

a> ° (3 


t- 






oo 


co 


WS 


CN 












hi) CO 

o3 a 


©& 


CM 




fe * 








£ H 








<1 








H 








« 








& 








Eh 
















Q 








fc 








a 








Ph 








X 








m 








&. 








o 








m 








% 








a 








H 






























DO 




a 








2 





hi 

PI 









3 




U 


h 


m 


















ft °B 










to 


** 


H* 


l*a 


o 


CO 


**! 


>• « X 




















< H 








_ 








fl 








3 <a 








o t: 








a 5 

Oj O (3 


CN 


-** 




CO 


eo 


o 


CN 


co 




CO 


CM 




^ a 


^ 






fe x 








£ h 








<! 








H 








« 








D 








H 
















Q 








Z 








a 








Ph 








X 








a 








a 








o 








CO 








a 








a 








Eh 


















"3 




5 




CD 


3 




ft 


h 


S 1 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



585 



Table 18. — Expenditure in 

Income, 

Rent, 

Fuel, 

Lighting, 

Clothing, 

Taxes, 

Insurance : — 

Property, 

Life, . 
Organization, 
Religion, . 
Charity, 
Furniture, . 
Books and newspapers 
Liquors, 
Tobacco, . 
Sickness and death, 
Amusements, vacations, 
Other purposes, . 
Food, 



Detail of 253 Families in Massachusetts, 1903. } 

$958.36 
146.36 



26 


66 


10.93 


134.87 


21 


13 


7.99 


24 


13 


22.50 


12 


63 


5 


78 


79.37 


11 


40 


17 


94 


12.89 


18 


69 


11 


48 


27 


11 


370.20 



1 Items of expenditure per family do not in every case represent the average for total families, 
but the average for the number of families having kind of expenditure specified. 



586 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Table 19. — Analysis of Expenditure for Food of 258 Families in Massa- 
chusetts, 1903. 1 
Beef: — 



Fresh, 

Salt, . 
Hog products : — 

Fresh, 

Salt, . 
Other meat, 
Poultry, 
Fish, 
Eggs, 
Milk, 
Butter, 
Cheese, 
Lard, 
Tea, . 
Coffee, 
Sugar, 
Molasses, 
Flour and meal, 
Bread, 
Rice, 
Potatoes, 
Other vegetables, 
Fruit, 

Vinegar, pickles and condiments, 
Other food, 
Total per family. 



$56.14 
24.75 

21.12 

14.68 

15.92 

12.83 

19.57 

14.37 

29.60 

32.28 

2.71 

11.81 

2.93 

4.52 

20.32 

2.53 

24.73 

8.14 

1.93 

11.22 

9.50 

9.81 

4.18 

14.61 

370.20 



1 Items of expenditure per family do not in every case represent 



the average for total families, 



but the average for the number of families having kind of expenditure specified 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



587 









co 




OS 




- 




t~ 






US 






^_J 


o 




-r- 








lO 










a5 




OS 




05 




US 




o 






d 




s 


«© 




•<*< 




r^ 




oo 






^*< 




5 
a 


















































25 




CM 


>o 










CM 


CM 




OO 




5 

03 




00 


CO 


o 

OS 


»o 


CO 


CM 

2 


OS 
CM 


d 


o 


d 






-Cf 


CO 


00 


cN 


US 






us 








»-l 


*o 






~ 






CM 


CI 


CM 


co 








oo 




_ 




CO 




m 






OS 






; 


- H 




00 




•- 1 




•& 












e 


_I 


' 


M 




r~ 




_H 




' 


t^ 






o> 


■**< 




o 




EC 










00 




Q 

o 
o 





CM 








CO 




■**< 






CO 


























fe 




o 




c 


OS 




CM 


■* 


CO 




OO 




• 


"3 


CM 


c 


us 


ob 


>o 


CO 


C! 


CM 


CM 






§ 


d 


t>- 


os 


CO 


CO 


OS 


"S 


r~- 


l-^ 


t^. 






f~ 


Cl 


T 


us 


m 


1- 


CSS 


us 


OS 


o ' 










CI 


CM 


r I 


CM 


<M 


<M 


CO 


CM 


CO 








«» 
























8 




o 




00 




CM 

C55 






CM 


*"H 


6 


o 


US 


1 


■^ 


1 


© 


1 


o> 


1 


1 


CO 


^3 


g 


en 


co 




CO 




00 




^ 






OO 


§ 
1 


E 
























§ 




CM 


,_, 


fr_ 


CO 


o 


O 


00 


o 


OS 


o 


j 


«i 


CO 


•"»> 


EC 


CO 


US 


CO 


US 


00 


1 - 


00 


o 


o 


co 


_H 


•«*< 


CO 


CM 


o 


00 


CO 


,_, 


f^i 




« 




CO 


CO 


t~ 


OS 


c 


o 


CM 


c 


CM 


*>H 






dt> 




















V? 


























1 






U3 




CO 




00 




CM 










! 


CM 




CM 








00 






CO 




O 


d 


' 


00 


' 


CO 


' 


J^l 


' 


' 


CO 






o> 


co 




CO 




■* 




■*t< 






lO 


fj 


J 


*"' 


«t> 




















^ 


D 
















































fe 






US 


us 


os 




OS 




OS 


■^1 


CD 


"S 


CO 


■<*< 


CO 


os 


OS 


CM 


OS 


t~- 


us 


us 


m 


1 




| 


us 


„ 


CM 


CM 


CO 


■* 


CO 


d 


OS 


d 




CO 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CO 


CM 


co 


CO 

1 




























a 


s 




c 


| 


OS 




t~ 


l 


| 


CM 


Jh 




s 


M< 








00 




t--i 






US 


Ch 




en 


00 




o 








OS 






00 


^-^ 


jj 




M 








*" 












£; 






CO 


•* 


t. 


o 


00 


■* 


US 


o 


O 


8 


8 


M 


00 


CO 


e» 


o 


M 


t~- 


(M 


o 


o 




1 


•«*< 


CO 


00 


co 


CO 


d 


00 


d 


00 


US 




s 


OS 


— 






us 


CO 


at 


CI 

CM 


CO 
CM 














































































v 


























5- 


























-§ 




















































•i>> 


























^3 




»H 






















& 




o 
en 






















H 


























1 




ft 

3 
o 






















d 




O 


© 


1 


8 


1 


d 


1 


d 

c 


1 


' 


0) 

> 
o 

T3 


H 






s 




CO 




t^ 




CM 






d 


J 






0) 








i 




Y 






e3 


pq 






T3 
(3 




© 




o 




O 






o 


H 






« 




= 

CO 




us 






o 

CM 


H 


s 

o 
o 




P 




•» 














*+ 




























fc 




























i 

= 

s 

o 




















u 

> 








8 


© 

o 


£ 


d 

c 


S 


§ 


d 


d 
o 


d 


o 








3 


»c 


CO 


r^ 


OO 


Ci 


o 




Cl_ 


























C8 








6 


g 


o 


© 


© 


8 


o 


o 


d 










o 


s 


o 


o 


s 


8 


O 










» 


■V 


lO 


cc 


** 


00 


o 




°\ 



588 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Table 21. — Expenditure of Average Income, by Amounts, 1903, 1901, 
1890, 1883 and 1874. 



Year. 


Rent. 


Fuel. 


Clothing. 


Food. 


Light 

and 

Sundries. 


Total. 


1903, 

1901 

1890, 

1883, 

1874 


$132.32 
105.22 
78.01 
148.95 
111.30 


$23.64 
48.13 
33.07 
32.42 
45.72 


$82.87 
108.48 
69.35 
120.39 
106.68 


$258.38 
469.32 
223.71 
271.73 
449.58 


$134.50 
115.69 
96.84 
80.95 
45.72 


$631.71 
846.83 
534.19 
754.42 
762.72 



Table 22. — Expenditure of Average Income, by Percentages, 1903, 1901, 
1890, 1883 and 1874. 



Year. 


Rent. 


Fuel. 


Clothing. 


Food. 


Sundries. 


1903 


20.95 


3.74 


13.12 


40.90 


21.76 


1901, 


12.43 


5.681 


12.81 


55.43 


13.65 


1890 


15.38 


6.52 


13.62 


44.12 


20.30 


1883, 


19.74 


4.30 


15.95 


49.28 


10.73 


1874 


17.00 


6.00 


15.00 


56.00 


6.00 



1 Light is included in this figure. 

Family A. 
Table 23. — Expenditure by Amounts, 1885 and 1907. 



Year. 


Number 

in 
Family. 


Food. 


Fuel. 


Light. 


Clothing. 


Service. 


Amuse- 
ments. 


Sundries. 


1885, . 
1907, . 


6 

4 


$547 
653 


$80 
100 


$49 
36 


$450 
650 


$182 
208 


$20 
25 


$409 
269 



Table 24. — Expenditure and Income, 1885 and 1907. 



Year. 


Number in 
Family. 


Total Income. 


Total Expend- 
iture. 


1885, 

1907, 


6 
4 


$1,800 
2,000 


$1,734 
1,941 





Table 25. — Expenditure for Food, 1885 and 1907 




Year. 


Meat, 

Provisions and 

Groceries. 


Fish. 


Butter. 


Milk. 


1885 

1907, 


$384 
520 


$58 

7 


$57 
78 


$48 
48 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



589 



1 



3* 



OJ 





<r> 




Ci 




>-s 


pq 


2S" 




oo 


►* 




•J 




p, 


eo 


<\ 


s 


'- 


5S 



I 





t- 


,_, 


us 




o 


lO 


& a 


t^ 




CO 


CM 


■^ 


00 


? 


2 

1 


1 


CO 

1 


_ 

+ 


1 












§ 






CO 


"5 


lO 


"5 


C 




o 


CO 


OS 


t~ 


CD 




00 










CM 


CM 






CM 




3 














DQ 


















CO 


*n 


U3 


o 


O 


■SI 




■* 




CO 


lO 


no 




_ 






t~- 






2 


00 




*"" 


o 




&»E> 




















» 




s 
d 


O 
UO 


O 

ITS 


lO 


o 

CO 


8 


§ 


c3 
3 

a 


^. 


CO 


CO 


_ 


CO 


o 






































1-4 














c 




















lO 










io 


CM 


CM 


— 


o 


o 


09 


to 


CO 


CO 






Tt< 


£ 


co 


■-. 


CO 










T-m 










OP 














X 
















o 


© 






«c 






t~ 






CO 




o 


•Sag 


























CM 


lO 




->cH 


CM 


















S«i 














T3 


o 


00 


>o 


o 


o 


00 








■* 






lO 


rfj3 














lO 












13 




CO 






CO 


lO 


^ 














M 


t> 


CM 


o 


00 






G 


*^ 




■"*! 




»o 




_S 


rH 


CO 


m 


OS 


^ 


CM 














CO 


O 


S<=> 












O 


























1^ 


-3 

8 


Jr^ 


CM 


t~ 


o 




*-< 


CO 


CO 




_H 


Tt< 


■* 














CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CO 


CO 




o 


O 


O 


o 


o 




J^ 










_ 


o 


c 














oo 


CM 


CM 










ti 


m 




CM 


CM 


CM 


<M 


ai 

s 

o 


O 


13 


m 












00 


_ 


O 


o 


^ 


liS 


CO 


CO 


Tf . 


VS 






t— 








d 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


rc 


CM 


<& 












i. 














< 














a 














> 




















CM 


** 








C5 
















C5 


OS 


C5 


-- 


C5 



590 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Table 27. — Typical Monthly Expenditure of a Canadian Family of Five, 
living on a Salary of $1,200, reckoned at 1897 and 1907 Prices. 





Items of Expendituke. 


1897. 


1907. 


Items of Expenditure. 


1897. 


1907. 


Rent, 

Fuel * . 

Food 

Clothing, .... 


$18.00 

5.50 

30.00 

16.00 


$23.00 

7.00 

40.00 

20.00 


Light 

Servant, .... 

Totals, 


$1.00 
7.00 


$0.50 
10.00 


$77.50 


$100.50 



Part 2. — A Comparative Presentation of Various Studies of 
Family Budgets in the United States and in Europe. 

The data available for Part 1 were insufficient to furnish a basis 
for any hard-and-fast conclusions. For Part 2 we have ampler ma- 
terial, because we are not confined to one State. The results of the 
studies of a large number of budgets ought to give certain general 
principles as to the way in which normal family budgets are made up, 
within a range of income groups that practically confines expenditures 
to the elementary physical necessities. We can discover the average 
percentages of income spent for various necessities within income 
groups and the variations of these percentages with changes in amount 
of income. If these averages are based upon a large number of 
budgets, it will be safe to assume that our conclusions obtain in a 
general way in normal families. This does not mean that it would 
be possible to take a given income and tell in detail just how a family 
would spend it; the influence of race, occupation, tradition, mental 
characteristics and other determining factors must be allowed for. It 
is clear, however, that a study of a large number of budgets with 
especial reference to the percentages of expenditure would give us a 
framework to guide us in estimating the effects of the various tenden- 
cies that have been separately studied. A basis would then be furnished 
for rational estimates of the way in which increasing prices have 
affected the standard of living, even though we are unable to get much 
data upon this subject from the direct study of the budgets during 
a period of years. 

This can be made clearer by a typical case.- If it is found to be 
generally true that as income increases the proportion expended for 
food decreases and the proportion expended for sundries and clothing 
increases, it will be evident if the income is actually decreased on 
account of rise in prices without a corresponding increase in wages, 
that the proportion of income spent for clothing and sundries will 
either have to be reduced or the family will have less to eat. If 
savings were previously included under sundries, they will be reduced 
or wiped out. If the family income previously barely permitted it 
to maintain the physical efficiency of its members, with a very slight 
margin for sundries, such a diminution of income can only mean less 
food, and less food will mean physical deterioration and ill-health. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 591 

Ernest Engel (1821-96) while at the head of the Statistical Bureau 
of Saxony conducted extensive investigations of workingmen's bud- 
gets. As a result of these studies he formulated tables that have be- 
come classical. (Table 28.) From these tables Mr. Engel propounded 
four economic laws that are as follows : — 

First. — That the greater the income the smaller the percentage of 
outlay for subsistence. 

Second. — The percentage of outlay for clothing is approximately 
the same, whatever the income. 

Third. — The percentage for lodging or rent and for fuel and light 
is approximately the same, whatever the income. 

Fourth. — As the income increases in amount the percentage of out- 
lay for sundries becomes greater. 

Let us now take the results of a number of investigations, and test 
their results by Engel's laws. The investigations selected for this 
comparison are chosen either because based on the study of large num- 
bers of families or because they are comparatively recent. They are 
as follows : — 

Investigation of cost of living of workingmen in textile and glass 
industries, made by the United States Bureau of Labor in 1891, already 
referred to in Part 1, where summaries of the budgets for Massa- 
chusetts have been presented. Total number of budgets, 5,284. 

Investigation of cost of living, made by the United States Bureau 
of Labor in 1903, already referred to in Part 1, where summaries of 
the budgets for Massachusetts have been presented. The investigation 
was based upon the study of 25,440 family budgets. 

Investigation of wage earners budgets in New York, made in 1905 
by Mrs. Louise B. More of Greenwich House. This investigation was an 
intimate study of 200 families on the lower west side of New York City. 

Investigation of the standard of living among working-men's fam- 
ilies in New York City in 1907, by Robert Coit Chapin, under the 
auspices of the New York State Conference of Charities and Cor- 
rection and the Russell Sage Foundation. This was an intensive study 
of 391 families. 

Investigation of the Homestead Commission in Washington, D. C, 
made in 1907, and based upon the budgets of 2,078 families. 

Table 29 enables us to "compare the results of these five investigations. 
It gives the percentage of expenditure for various purposes by 
classified incomes. 

In the case of rent it will be seen that the investigations of the 
United States Bureau of Labor of 1891 and 1903 agree with EngePs 
law, — that the proportion of income spent for rent is about the same 
for all incomes. But the three more recent studies all show a decreas- 
ing proportion expended for rent. For New York this is probably due 
to the fact that the minimum housing is abnormally high, so high for 
low incomes that with higher incomes they cannot afford to move into 
a better house because they are already paying an abnormal amount 



592 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



for rent. In both New York studies rent takes more than 20 per 
cent, of the family's income for all incomes under $800 a year. 

EngePs law is supported by the figures for fuel and light. The pro- 
portion expended remains practically the same for all incomes covered 
by the investigations, and, furthermore, the percentages very nearly 
agree for all the investigations. 

EngePs law in regard to clothing is not borne out by all the studies, 
although the increase in the proportion expended for clothing is usu- 
ally slight. There is considerable variation in the percentages of 
expenditure for clothing in each income group in the different investi- 
gations. EngePs law with regard to clothing — that the percentage of 
expenditure for that purpose did not tend to increase with increasing 
income — has never been borne out by studies made in the United 
States. 

The percentages of expenditure for food bear out EngePs law for 
food, — that as income increases the percentage of expenditure for 
food decreases. In the $700-$800 and $800-$900 groups the figures 
for different investigations differ but slightly. 

EngePs law with regard to sundries is strikingly borne out by every 
investigation. As income increases the proportion spent for sundries 
increases. 

On the whole, there is a remarkable harmony in the results of these 
five investigations, based as they were upon families in different lo- 
calities and at different times, and studied by various methods. It 
would be safe to deduce from these tables a few generalizations about 
the expenditure of the income of a workingman's family under normal 
conditions. For weekly incomes of from $12 to $18 a week the income 
would usually be spent about as follows: rent, 18-20 per cent.; fuel 
and light, 5 per cent.; clothing, 14 per cent.; food, 43-45 per cent.; 
sundries, 15-17 per cent. This analysis may not actually fit the ex- 
penditure of many families, but it would probably be found that nor- 
mal families with incomes of the amount stated tend to approach these 
figures. 



Table 28. — Expenditures, by Income Groups and Percentages; EngeVs 
Table for Saxony, 1857. 



ITEMS OF EXPENDITURE. 


Income. 


$22 5 -$300. 


$4 50 -$600. 


$750-$l,100. 


Subsistence, 

Clothing, 

Lodging 

Fuel and light, 


62.00 
16.00 
12.00 
5.00 


55.00 
18.00 
12.00 
5.00 


50.00 
18.00 
12.00 
5.00 


Education, church, etc., 

Legal protection, 

Care of health, 

Comfort (mental and bodily recreation), . 


95.00 
2.00 
1.00 
1.00 
1.00 


90.00 
3.50 
2.00 
2.00 
2.50 


85.00 
5.50 
3.00 
3.00 
3.50 




5.00 


10.00 


15.00 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



593 





•1681 'JoqBq 


Ci 


(M 


CM 


eo 


- 


us 


00 


Tj< 


-H 


-H 


1^ 











jo nnajng -g n 


2 


OS 


00 


00 


Ci 


CM 


CO 
CM 


id 
CM 


Ci 
CM 


00 


eo 
eo 









•£06T '-toqBT 


IO 


t- 





■o 


cm 


CO 


to 


O 


CI 


eo 


T- 


•^1 






s 


jo nsaang -g n 


*o 


00 


=o 


to 


r^ 


— 


Ol 


CO 
CM 


CO 
CM 


eo 


CO 
CM 


10 

Ol 












10 


CM 





CM 


O 


Ci 


■* 


00 






t^. 


CM 


c 


•aioj^ 


1 


1 


_; 


— 


CO 


X 


Ci 


C^ 


Ol 


CO 






to 


OO 


55 

m 
































•uoie 










O 


10 


Ci 


*H 


CO 


CM 








-H 




-61UIUIOQ 69UIOJJ 










CM 


CM 

CI 


CM 


CM 


CO 
CM 


Ol 








IO 














,_, 


,_, 






,_ 




CM 








•uiduqQ 


1 


1 


1 


CO 




CO 


2! 


O 


to 


^ 


Ci 


CO' 


CM 
CM 


CO 
CM 




1681 'JoqBT 


CD 


CM 


^ 





00 


PM 


00 


O 


CO 


t- 


CO 


CO 








jo nBajng -g -[\ 


Ci 


It 


.0 


Ui 


CO 


51 


00 

CO 


00 
CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


00 
CM 






£061 'Joq^T 


00 


CO 





00 


-H 


<* 


Td 


eo 


Ci 


t~ 


eo 


~CH 






Q 


jo nuajng -g -fi 



10 


1^ 




to 


O 


CO 


Th 


5 


Ci 
CO 


co 

CO 


CO 


eo 
eo 












CM 


■^ 


,H 


to 


CM 


00 


00 


eo 






IO 


00 






1 


1 


•»*< 


-r« 


O 




■«*l 










1 






fe 








>* 


■* 


10 


•*! 


■* 


>* 










CO 


CO 


•uoie 










IO 


«# 


CM 


Ci 


<# 


CO 













-eiuiraoQ eatuou 










CO 


-+H 


O 


**l 


00 

CO 


CO 

eo 








e-a 


•uiduq^ 








00 


Tt< 


to 


CO 


CO 


t» 


t~ 


CO 


O 


to 


00 

























to 


















TJH 


"* 


■* 


■«*i 


•* 


"* 








-*< 


CO 




'T68T 'JoqeT 


00 


eo 


<* 


CO 


CM 


00 


CO 


O 


00 


to 


»o 


t^ 








jo m39jng -g *_q 


22 


«* 


3 


21 


10 


IO 


CO 


to 


CO 


t-~ 


-0 


to. 






*S06I 'JoqT3-[ 


to 


co 


N 


CO 


Ci 


CO 


■0 


to 


co 


O 


co 


O 








jo nt?9jng -g a 


00 


00 





j5 


^J 


01 


CO 


co 


-* 


10 


«# 


lO 












CO 


CO 


10 





CM 


CO 


<* 


00 






CO 


CO 


O 
J 

n 


•8JOJ\[ 




' 


t~ 


Ci 


co 


Ci 


Ci 








es 


' 


' 


1-4 


to 


















^ 




rt 






1-1 


" H 


•uois 










Ci 


to 


~ 


to 


r^ 


IO 








CM 




-SIUIUIO3 S91UOJJ 










OS 





~ 


s 


2 


5 








O 


•uid^qQ 











T* 


Ci 


■* 





eo 


10 





01 


t- 


00 










CO 


CM 


O) 


CO 


s 


2J 


to 


s 


10 


2 


to 




•T68T 'Joqui 





•# 


OS 


10 


US 


r. 


CM 


-H 


t^ 


<# 


00 


OS 






a 


jo nuajng -g ft 


06 


'"" 


CO 





co 


IO 


to 


IO 


•# 


"* 


CO 


CM 






•£061 'Joq^ 


00 


,H 








_ 


t^ 


01 








CO 


CO 


O 






o 
o 

J 


jo nramg -g [\ 


*" 


r~ 


r^ 


CO 





tO 


IO 


"* 


"* 


T(( 


"* 


•* 












lfl 


CM 





t^ 


«* 


■*! 


CO 


<o 






IO 


CM 


•9JOJ«J 


1 




O 


to 


CD 


"5 


CO 


to 


-* 


"* 


1 


' 


■* 


CO 


•uoie 










■* 


CO 


00 


eo 





CO 








r^ 


9 

& 


-biuiuioq earaou 










IO 


■* 


■* 


<# 


<* 


co 








CM 




































































•uid^qQ 


1 


1 


1 


to 


to 


IO 


to 


to 


to 


"* 


co 


co 


CO 


"* 




*T68T 'Joq^g 


XJJ 


CO 


Ci 


cm 


*H 


•0 


CO 


O 


OS 


- 


CM 


to 








jo nt39.mg -g -fi 


IO 


3 


•* 


IO 


IO 


10 


to 


CD 


** 


IO 


Ol 


CM 






•£06T '-ioqtJT 


Ci 


O 


SO 


IO 


-* 


rt< 


.H 


O 


»o 


IO 


to 


TJH 






5! 


jo nsajng -g -n 






S 














t~ 


CO 


r^ 












•O 


Ci 


-* 


t- 


CM 


CO 


eo 


eo 









CM 


W 


•8IOJV 


1 




O 




Ol 


M 


^H 




t^ 


t^ 


1 








tf 








CO 


CM 




CM 


Ol 




^ 


rt 










•uoie 










IO 


_< 


CO 


CO 


CO 











eo 




-BIUIU103 eauiojj 










J^ 


£ 


>o 


CO. 


eo 


O 








10 










OO 


Ci 


CO 


Ci 


t . 


- 


^ 


CM 


00 


00 


eo 




•uid^qQ 


1 




1 


to 

CM 


US 
CM 


CO 
CM 


CM 




CM 


S9 


00 


CO 


OS 


to 


CO 


a 






























§ 






























o 






























o 




























,- 


z 

































s 


g 





O* 


CO 


O 


s 


s" 


O 


O 


R" 


R" 


R" ? 


I 1 




*» 


*» 




to 


-0 


I- 


00 





_ 






CO 


-tH u 




•8 

a 

p 


O 

c 



c 





- 


£ 


i 


& 


O 


CO 

a 


i 





A i 


i s 






M 




"* 










Ci 






Cl_ 


CO •«: 


1 "i 



594 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Table 30. — Average Income and Expenditure. 





Group I., 


Group II., 


Group III., 


Items of Expenditure. 


$600-$699; 


$700-$799; 


$800-$899; 




Average, $650. 


Average, $748. 


Average, $846. 


Rent, . . . . . 


$154 


$161 


$168 


Carfare, 


11 


10 


16 


Fuel and light, 


38 


37 


41 


Furniture, 


6 


8 


7 


Insurance, 


13 


18 


18 


Food, 


279 


314 


341 


Meals eaten away from home, 


11 


22 


18 


Clothing 


83 


99 


114 


Health, 


14 


14 


22 


Taxes, dues and contributions, 


8 


9 


11 


Recreation and amusement, .... 


3 


6 


7 


Education 


5 


5 


7 


Miscellaneous, 


25 


32 


41 


Totals 


$650 


$735 


$811 



1 Report of Special Committee on Standard of Living in New York City. 

Part 3. — Family Budgets and a Normal Standard of Living. 

A thoroughgoing study of family budgets in a community ought to 
make it possible to determine the minimum income necessary for a 
family to maintain a normal standard of living. The value of such 
definite information for advancing the welfare of the people is great. 
It can form the basis of a sane agitation for a " living wage " for the 
workers. It can create an accurate standard for relief work. 

Writers on social questions have occasionally assumed certain round 
sums as the cost of maintaining a normal standard of living. For 
instance, Edward T. Devine, in " Principles of Relief " 1904, p. 35, 
says : — 

Eecognizing the tentative character of such an estimate, it may be worth 
while to record the opinion that in New York City, where rentals and pro- 
visions are perhaps more expensive than in any other large city, for an 
average family of five persons the minimum income on which it is practicable 
to remain self-supporting and maintain any approach to a decent standard 
of living is $600 a year. 

Prof. Albion W. Small, head of the department of sociology in the 
University of Chicago, is quoted as having said in a lecture : — ■ 

No man can live, bring up a family and enjoy the ordinary human 
happiness on a wage of less than $1,000 a year. 



John Mitchell, formerly vice-president of the American Federation 
of Labor, has said that the minimum wage that will maintain a work- 
ingman and his family according to the " American standard " is $600 
a year. 

None of these estimates gives us any of the details from which the 
generalization has been arrived at, and none, except that of Dr. Devine, 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 595 

gives unit and locality. It is evident that the minimum income neces- 
sary to maintain a normal standard of living will vary considerably 
in different places, because of the differences in living conditions, prices, 
wages, rents, social life, opportunities for recreation, etc. As condi- 
tions in the same locality are changing from year to year, it would 
also be necessary to revise such an estimate from time to time. 

Only those estimates of the cost of a normal standard of living are sound 
which are based on a given social unit, and on the cost of the essential 
elements of that standard in a given community and at a given time. (Re- 
port of Committee on Standard of Living, New York State Conference, 
Rochester, 1906.) 

Few such studies have been made in this country, and so far as can 
be learned, none has been attempted in Boston. The New York 
State Conference of Charities and Correction undertook an investiga- 
tion of the cost of a normal standard of living in New York City in 
1907, to which I have already referred in Part 2. This investigation 
was in great detail, and was based upon 318 budgets. A review of 
the conclusions arrived at ought to. give us some suggestions as to 
conditions in Boston. Conditions in the two cities differ considerably, 
and there is no basis for measuring these differences. For example, 
it is generally said that rents for tenement houses are lower in Boston 
than in New York, — how much lower we have no means of knowing; 
so that it would not be wise to attempt to adapt the conclusions to 
Boston. 

For the report in New Y'ork City 224 family budgets were selected 
from the 318 that were available. The income of these families ranged 
between $600 and $900. The average incomes and disbursements of the 
three groups are shown in Table 30. 

Group I., $600-$700. — Do the families showing incomes varying 
from $600 to $700 maintain a standard of living sufficient to preserve 
physical and mental efficiency? The average family of five persons 
in this group pays $13 a month for rent, for which they are able to 
obtain in the Borough of Manhattan from 2 to 3 rooms. The rooms 
are apt to be low and comparatively small, and one room is usually 
dark. The food disbursement for such a family is approximately 
$270 a year for five individuals, or a 3.5 unit. This is $82 a year per 
unit, or 22V 2 cents per man a day. In reckoning the consumption of 
food, the proportionate amounts assigned to each person, as compared 
with the requirements, for an adult man are expressed by 1; adult 
woman, .8; children, .3 to .7, depending upon the age. The family 
clothes itself at a cost of $84 a year. It is difficult to determine whether 
a family of five can buy enough clothing for their needs on $84 a year. 
Families in this group often receive gifts of clothing from relatives, 
employers and friends. 

A family having an income of $650 a year spends 24 per cent, of 



596 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

its income for rent, 45 per cent, for food, or 85 per cent, for four 
items, rent, food, clothing, fuel and light. Only 2.5 per cent, is spent 
for education, recreation and dues to societies; the other 12.5 per 
cent, is for health, insurance, furniture, carfares, meals away from 
home and miscellaneous. The family is unable to make any provision 
against accident, or to lay by anything for a rainy day. Twenty 
of the 72 families in this group admitted being in debt, thus showing 
how difficult it is to live within this income. The committee concluded 
that an income between $600 and $700 per annum was insufficient for 
a family of five to maintain a proper standard of living in the Borough 
of Manhattan. Leaving aside the exceptions, it is apparent that many 
families in this group have a fierce struggle for existence. The maxi- 
mum of food bought approximates the minimum set up by authorities 
on this subject. No provision can be made for accidents or emergen- 
cies. If either of these occur, the family runs into debt. Were it not 
for the charity of friends, relatives, employers or philanthropic organi- 
zations, the expenditures of the family would be larger than the income. 
Such a family literally lives a hand-to-mouth existence, with neither 
opportunity nor means for enjoyment or recreation. The health of 
its members cannot be safeguarded from its own resources. The hous- 
ing accommodations barely prevent overcrowding. The committee 
states : — 

It requires no citation of elaborate statistics to bring convincing proof 
that $600 to $700 is wholly inadequate to maintain a proper standard of 
living, and no self-respecting family should be asked or expected to live 
on such an income. 

Group II., $700-$800. — The average expenditure for this group was 
$735, — $85 more than in the preceding group, — to be accounted for 
as follows: $45 more for food, $16 more for clothing, the balance of 
$24 fairly evenly distributed among the other items of the budgets. 
All of the 79 families in this group lived within their incomes. 
The housing conditions remain practically the same. In the food bud- 
get the $45 additional permits of more animal food and a better quality. 
The per capita per day is increased to 25 cents. All in all there is 
a tendency . toward improvement in condition, and were it not that 
housing conditions have not improved, it might be assumed that the 
family is beginning to reach a point where a fairly decent standard 
of living is to be maintained. The committee finds : — 

The committee believes that with an income of between $700 and $800 a 
family can barely support itself, provided that it is subject to no extraor- 
dinary expenditures by reason of sickness, death or other untoward circum- 
stances. Such a family can live without charitable assistance through 
exceptional management and in the absence of emergencies. 

Group III., $800-$900. — The average expenditure of this group is 
$811, the average income $846. There is an average saving of $35 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 597 

per family. — a marked variation from the preceding- groups. There 
is an increase of $76 in expenditures over Group II, of which 50 per 
cent, goes for food and clothing, 10 per cent, for rent, 15 per cent. 
for miscellaneous and 25 per cent, for other items. The housing is 
better. There are more baths and particularly more toilets in the 
apartments. The rooms are larger, with more light. The amount that 
is now disbursed for food (27 cents a day) and for clothing- appears 
to be adequate. They have opportunities for recreation and for amuse- 
ment that are fairly normal. The committee sums up : — 

In view of all these facts, the committee is of opinion that it is fairly 
conservative in its estimate that $825 is sufficient for the average family 
of five individuals, comprising the father, mother and three children under 
fourteen years of age, to maintain a fairly proper standard of living in the 
Borough of Manhattan. 1 

It is interesting to observe that Mrs. More's study, based upon 200 
families in New York City, reaches conclusions as to the minimum 
income necessary to maintain a normal standard of living which are 
very similar to the conclusions of the State Conference of Charities. 
She says (p. 269) : — 

This investigation has shown that a well-nourished family of five in a 
city neighborhood needed at least $6 a week for food. The average for 39 
families having five in family was $327.24 a year for food. If we consider 
$6 a week (or $312 a year) as 43.4 per cent, of the total expenditures 
(which was the average expended for food in these 200 families, and very 
near the average for the workingmen's families in the extensive investigation 
of the Department of Labor), the total expenditures would be about $720 
a year. It therefore seems a conservative conclusion to draw from this 
study that a fair living wage for a workingman's family of average size 
in New York City should be at least $728 a year, or a steady income of 
$14 a week. Making allowance for a larger proportion of surplus than was 
found in these families, which is necessary in order to provide adequately 
for the future, the income should be somewhat larger than this, — that is, 
from $800 to $900 a year. 

Part 4. — The Budgets of 43 Families in Boston for a Week in 

1909. 
All of these schedules were filled out in March, 1909, for the in- 
vestigation of the Board of Trade of Great Britain into the cost of 
living in cities in the United States. It did not seem wise to compute 
the budgets of these families for the year for comparison with the 
results of the investigations presented in Part 1, because a week's bud- 
get gives insufficient data, taken by itself, upon which to base the 

1 This review is in part taken direct from the report of special committee on standard of liv- 
ing of New York State Conference of Charities and Correction, Albany, November, 1907, Lee 
K. Frankel, chairman, pp. 263-283 in Chapin's " The Standard of Living among Workingmen's 
Families " in New York City (1909). 



598 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

entire year's budget. To reckon the yearly income on the basis of 
a week's income might be most misleading, for the income may be very 
intermittent, as few workingmen of this class are employed every 
week in the year. The studies of Mrs. More in New York and of 
Dr. Forman in Washington have clearly shown how easily the budget 
for a single week may be misleading. For example, Dr. S. E. Forman, 
in his report on conditions of living among the poor, based upon the 
study of 19 families in Washington, D. C, shows, in a table which is 
reproduced in part (Table 31), how the expenditures for food in the 
same family vary from week to week. He comments as follows : — 

What is the explanation of these great differences in food expenditure? 
How can the fact be accounted for that Family No. 1, for example, spent 
$5.31 for food in the first week of the investigation and $8.57 during the 
last week? In this instance the explanation is the very simple one that in 
the first week the wage earner was idle about half the time, while in the 
last he was employed every day. In the case of Family No. 2, why was 
there a fall from $5.86 in the second week to $3.91 in the third week? 
Because in the third week the rent fell due. Why in the budget of Family 
No. 3 is there the great difference between $6.77 the first week and $2.45 
the last week? Because in the last week the rent had to be paid and a 
payment of $6 upon an old debt had to be made ; and, furthermore, the wage 
earner was idle part of the time. Thus we might go through the accounts 
of every family, and find that any considerable decrease in food expendi- 
tures was almost always due to rent or some financial stress of the week. 
These cases clearly show how easily one might err in estimating food ex- 
penditures for a whole year upon the basis of one week. 

This does not mean, however, that this information is of no value 
to us. It shows us in great detail just how a family spent its money 
during one week within a year of the present time. It ought to throw 
some light on present conditions. The detailed analysis of expendi- 
tures for food may prove of value in studying how a better knowledge 
of food values might reduce expenditures for food without diminishing 
the nourishment of the family. 

These families have incomes that vary all the way from $10 to $47 
a week. The large incomes are usually the result of the combined 
earnings of the father and his grown sons. The number of families 
with incomes over $20 is so great that an average for all incomes would 
be of little value. 

Table 32 gives the number of families having expenditure for various 
articles of food. Eggs, sugar, potatoes and other vegetables, beef, 
hog products, butter, milk and tea are bought by practically every 
family; fish, lard, flour and bread are bought by most families; coffee, 
molasses, rice, fruit, poultry, vinegar and other condiments are not 
bought as commonly as the other articles. 

Table 33 gives the expenditure for food in a week for each family, 
with weekly income and size of family. The largest items included 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



599 



under the beading " All Other Food " are cakes, crackers, etc., con- 
densed milk, cereals, cocoa, and in two or three instances olive oil. 
Expenditure for food shows a considerable variation in families of 
the same size and with the same income. These variations may in some 
cases be due to the fact that some unusual expenditure for clothing, 
furniture, etc., has cut down the amount to be spent for food in one 
of the families; in other cases the difference may be due to the ca- 
pacity of the housewife. The increased expenditures for meat, milk, 
eggs and butter with increasing income is marked. There is very little 
poultry bought by any of these families, and surprisingly little fruit. 
Expenditure for milk shows great variations. 

Table 34 gives classified expenditure for various purposes for each 
family for one week, with number in family, occupation of head of 
family and total weekly income. Clothing was not included in these 
schedules. 

Study of 19 Families in Washington, D. C, by Dr. S. E. Forman, 1906. 
Table 31. — Family Expenditure for Food. 1 



Family. 


First 
Week. 


Second 
Week. 


Third 
Week. 


Fourth 
Week. 


Fifth 
Week. 


No. 1 

No. 2 

No. 3 


S5.31 
6.00 
6.77 


$5.77 

5.86 
6.44 


S8.60 
3.91 
5.39 


$7.39 
4.76 
3.56 


S8.57 
4.07 
2.45 



1 From Bulletin 64 of the United States Bureau of Labor, p. 598. 



Budgets of 43 Families in Boston for One Week, 1909. 
Table 32. — Number of Families having Expenditure for Articles of Food. 



Items of Expenditure. 


Number 

of 
Families. 


Items of Expenditure. 


Number 
of 

Families. 


Beef, 


40 


Coffee, 


21 


Hog products, 








40 


Sugar, . 










43 


Other meat, . 








22 


Molasses, 










24 


Poultry, 








8 


Flour, . 










35 


Fish, . 








36 


Bread, 










26 


Eggs, . 








43 


Rice, . 










19 


Milk (fresh), 








40 


Potatoes, 










43 


Butter, . 








42 


Other vegetables, 








43 


Cheese, 








20 


Fruit, . 








10 


Lard, . 








31 


Vinegar and other condiments, 




17 


Tea, 








42 















600 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



6 



I 



•pooj JOJ pnoj, 


»2^3££?ONi>.incooooHoc©^Tt4cocococoi^por^io-Hcoo 

«5 05 0N'*0)rt^OCiai'*OCCONXOOOrtHTHffll>eOCC(»IN(Offl 


«t~C»^eOeOO^IOOOOOt~CO'**a!«0^4CJSOOOO^i'" H C»60t'~CCiO'*4 


•poo j J9q^0 II V 




•s^uaraipnoQ 


© CO lO CO l« oo 

i 1 2. i i i . i I s ? i.i i i i i i t °.°^. i-.i, , , , 

ft© 


'%™& 


oo io icio oom oo oo 

^ • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 [ 1 1 l ° "'*' '~ H MN rtW 

9© ""' 


•sejqi^aSaA Jaq^O 


l««ON<COlOOnOO®ll5l(!0!OOK50000u;OOll5!DlflOHO 


O ,_ ,_, 
ft© 


•sao^oj; 


looooiooioieoooffliootoioiflooisioiooioooiooioia 


O _ 
6© 


•aora 


O 1— 1 1— 1 O O O 1-H O 1— fHM 
^ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 • 1 ■ • • | | ■ | . ■ • 
ft© 


•p^ajg 


$0.20 
1.20 

.70 

.30 

1.12 

.25 

.60 
.15 
.20 

.70 
1.00 

.70 
2.00 
.25 
.15 
.35 

.35 


•paaj^ pui? mojj 


CO Ui CO OOO OlOOtOKSOK) inNOW if o o o o 
OOOJM TtlOi- 1 a^lOlO^OOH fflOOlH OlOlOO o 

ft© * _l H 


•sassBjoj^; 


"5 00 IO IO Ui CO t^CO Nil} »C 
,00,,00 i-l O O i-l OOO 

1^-11 -1 -III • • 1 • • 1 1 1 1 • • 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 

ft© 


•JBSllg 


ONNNOOrHOOINOOOOOO^NrtOfflNOINONNIMIMOWINTtl 
•"*!— l(Nr- 1 O i— (C0t^C0lO«*4i*li*li— It— li^CONCOINmiMl^CqMMTHrilN 


§ 


•98£OQ 


ui ui tows O i>- ui ooo oo ui t- ui 

1 ~ 1 1 . 1 1^1 . I^l^.l^llll 1 1 ~ e *~~ , 


"138 j. 


o»oioooeoia»oioioooio»o»ocoooooiocv]ioooioo»i5iooo 

lOONOlNlNMTHNcoiOINININiHlOrtlNiJIfilHegiOlOIMmiNNlM 


o 

9© 


•pj^rj 


i* oo O cocoi>- OOO WiHifC© COr« U4 -H Tti i*l o 

HO-HH OHO Oi*l OOOCO i-H i-H i-Hi-H i-l rt O 

o 
ft© 


•asaaqQ 


O OJLO O 0(N Ui OO OOO 
1-H O CO 1-H CO i-H 1-H 1-H 1-H O 

1 1 1 1 ^ 1 1 1 • • 1 1 -III • • 1 1 1 -II -II . . 

*© 


•ja^na: 


njiooooisoooioieoioooioisooisooioooiowooo 

TllHtOMM^MCOffl^iJKOH/COH/NH/^e^iftoWKIXSMWMCC 


o 

6©. 


•^nn 


itlO^H^OOIN NWtOOOMH/lMONtOai i*400i*li*IOOCOOCOiHi*l 
OOOOCOCOCO-^ ■>*< CM Ui O -^4 CO •** i*l i-4 Ui i*l 00 O CO 00 T« H i*4 CO CO i-H 

Ol-H 'iH 
9% 


•essa 


UJiflNiflOOOOOiOOiSllSOfflWiivoiflOOOiOOiOiOOOON 
NNHNINlOM>0'*lOfaNOnMOONei:cOOCOiH»^Tt'OtO(ON 


O -H rH H 


•q s M 


miflio owoifl 1*1 "5 o o ■* ui o o >o o ui o o o in 

CO CO CO 1*1 i-H CO CO CO i-l i-H CO CO IO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO i-H 

o 

ft© 


•^j^poj 


o o oo 

1*1 IO CO CO 

1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 1 •• 1 1 1 1 

ft© 


•^ajv; wq^o 


$0.80 
.33 

1.08 

.50 
.10 

.32 
.15 

.20 

1.25 
.75 
.20 

1.99 

- 


•s^onpoij 3ojj 


1*1 O Ui (OOOOlO o o >n it* CO NNOOOiOOOWNOIN 
i-H i-H i-H O O Ui i-H 00 l^lOO CO Ui MOS(DHHNra^t*NOH 

oh ■ ' h ■ ' • • -h -^ ■ 


•jaag; 


OlOOWWOlOOMiOOUJOOOO OOCOOOOOOiO o 
i-H -*f4 OOINON O i*4J>.COt^CO OCO O 00 00 Ui CO i*4 CO as »o CO Irt 

i-H 'CO ' "i-I 'i-i "i-l ' 'i-ii*i "i-H 't-Ht-4 'i-Ih t-I 

6© 


•^jiurej ui jaqranjsj 


(OOtO^ifCMCOMlONlOilfMlOinifMNlOCiSmOM^MlOIMW 


•auioonj 


oooooooot^oooooooooooooooooooo 

OOOOOOOOCOOiOOCOiOOOOOOOOlOOOOOiOOO 


i-Hi-HOOOCOCOCOi*4it4cv5COCOCOCOCOi*iOO»Ot^OOOOOOOOOCOOcOt^ 


9% 


6 


r4N«li)'K5«NOOClOH(N«i*lI)fflNMOOHMMiJllflfflNOOCl 





1910. 



t~co 

© © 


MON^-"SS!lSi«00» 


to © 


aNC-.KOCCKTfONN 


ir: r~- 


CCONlOOWUJ'H — < © © © 

oo«ioo«oiou;ia«H 


- 1 


-- - - - M ^ 


to ic 

CO © 


OIC ClSWNO 00 
"© .— © — iO— ' © 


iftintcwcaocio wo 

.-• tC !C IC -h CC N 1ft * M COW 




co w 


MC«OCNOO«U500 
CO«CCC«NOO>H00 


-* - -* *- , ~ 


©t«C0W©©©©i«©©W©© 




Cl!5 


oooo© oooo © 

i-h © -* CO © t-h —i 



HOUSE 

II 



No. 1750. 



601 



W© 


to US 1C 

©© — 'C 


occmo c t}< 

C <M ^ iO ^ i-h lO 




iota eo 

©©© 


■>*< CO 


(BlOOWffliflNO 
O © —< i-h © © i-i —i 




NOWXMONMC.OmNOOlfJ 
CO CO ~ •^>T*iTt>COCOCO->3<COCO'>3<IO 






■a 


■O CO 




■CO 
CO CO 




CtOOtOOOtOOOOO 




CO 


' 


CO -H 


■*00«COCCi-l CD 
i-i CO CO CO i-i CO IO- 


iO© 

-* CO 


» 


1* 1 


t^. IO r~- 00 CO © 
t-Jl-H t-^CO CO 


©oc©o©»o©toto©©io© 

CCCC?5INMNt»Nlft(NOO 



lSiQe<#OOiOOONNOOO 
«NifllOOONXNai-iOO'* 



- 


^<m~~ 


rtrt HH 


i-H tO©tO©tOiO«00©00 © 
~H C0CCC0COC0C0C0COCOC0 CO 




© 


© 

CD 

1 1 1 1 ■ 


©o 

WO! 


to© 

CO CO 


.25 
1.00 


1.27 
1.56 
2.00 
1.00 
1.50 


cifiL-jc-.i^nnftxomcoiti to 


_-, 


i-< CO 


~ "co 


©©OC©©0©iOOO©tO©©»0 

©©•M©©«tf>ciio-H©coco©r- 


« 







M^MXCCWCXC © ■* © 00 



©©©©C1©©©©©©©0© 
iO © © © CI IO © © © IQ to O © © 



602 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Table 34. — Classified Expenditure of 1+3 Families in Boston for One 

Week, 1909. 





>> 


















6 


6 


Occupation. 


6 

a 

o 


o 




3 


C 
o 

3 

"►3 


a 

1 

TO 

C 


1 


1 


6 


Switchman, 


§11.00 


$2.50 


$0.90 


$0.17 


- 


$0.65 


$6.55 


2 


6 


Stableman, 




11.00 


2.00 


1.05 


.11 


$1.00 


.35 


7.97 


3 


6 


Roofer, 




10.00 


2.75 


1.00 


.11 


- 


.30 


9.06 


4 


4 


Elevator man, 




10.00 


2.25 


.88 


.12 


- 


- 


4.73 


5 


3 


Teamster, . 




11.50 


2.25 


.88 


.12 


- 


- 


3.40 


6 


6 


Boiler maker, 




12.00 


3.00 


1.50 


.26 


- 


.30 


6.92 


7 


3 


City teamster, 




12.00 


3.50 


.90 


.25 


- 


.75 


5.17 


8 


3 


Coal teamster, 




12.00 


3.00 


.60 


.25 


.25 


- 


5.45 


9 


5 


Switchman, 




14.67 


3.25 


1.15 


.11 


- 


- 


5.82 


10 


5 


Tailor, 




14.00 


2.00 


.50 


- 


.25 


- 


8.90 


11 


7 


City teamster, 




13.50 


2.50 


.70 


.12 


2.50 


.60 


6.46 


12 


5 


Stableman, 




13.00 


2.75 


1.25 


.23 


- 


- 


6.09 


13 


4 


Engineer, . 




12.60 


2.50 


1.00 


.06 


- 


1.85 


7.31 


14 


3 


City teamster, 




13.50 


2.50 


.55 


.11 


.50 


.13 


8.00 


15 


5 


Teamster, . 




13.00 


2.50 


.45 


.06 


1.15 


.25 


4.78 


16 


5 


Teamster, . 




13.00 


3.00 


2.50 


.55 


.25 


.60 


9.84 


17 


4 


Tailor, 




14.00 


2.00 


.35 


.22 


.25 


- 


6.84 


18 


3 


Bill poster, 




18.00 


4.25 


- 


.75 


- 


- 


4.02 


19 


7 


City laborer, 




15.00 


2.50 


.50 


.11 


- 


.80 


9.13 


20 


5 


Teamster, . 




17.00 


2.50 


1.00 


.06 


- 


.75 


8.12 


21 


3 


Laundryman, 




18.00 


3.00 


.95 


.22 


- 


1.25 


8.13 


22 


3 


Machinist, . 




16.50 


2.50 


.75 


.11 


- 


.75 


4.67 


23 


9 


Teamster, . 




19.00 


3.00 


.90 


.33 


1.50 


.50 


11.79 


24 


3 


Bar tender, 




18.00 


4.00 


1.60 


.25 


1.00 


.50 


9.60 


25 


4 


Plumber, . 




18.00 


3.50 


1.70 


.18 


- 


.75 


8.37 


26 


3 


Teamster, . 




18.00 


3.50 


1.00 


.22 


- 


.70 


7.85 


27 


5 


Teamster, . 




18.50 


2.50 


.75 


.11 


- 


- 


8.21 


28 


2 


Baker, 




16.00 


3.00 


1.00 


.37 


.50 


- 


5.62 


29 


3 


(Man dead), 




17.00 


2.25 


.60 


.06 


- 


- 


4.69 


30 


3 


Machinist, . 




16.50 


2.50 


.75 


.11 


- 


- 


5.67 


31 


4 


Machinist, . 




19.00 


2.00 


.25 


.18 


- 


- 


10.63 


32 


3 


Hat maker, 




20 00 


2.25 


1.06 


.13 


- 


- 


6.88 


33 


8 


Printer, 




26.00 


4.00 


1.05 


.25 


- 


- 


12.30 


34 


6 


Laborer, 




21.22 


3.50 


.85 


.50 


- 


- 


9.62 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



603 



Table 34. — Classified Expenditure of 43 Families in Boston for One 
Week, 1909 — Concluded. 





1 


Occupation. 
















6 


.3 
6 




B 

o 
o 

a 
>— i 


a 


"q3 


3 


o 

c 


<3 

a 


T3 
O 
O 


35 


6 


Laborer, 


$23.50 


$2.00 


SI. 00 


$0.18 


$5.00 


$0.50 


$13.44 


36 


5 


Machinist, . 






21.00 


3.00 


1.05 


.05 


- 


.40 


10.01 


37 


6 


Metal worker, 






21.60 


2.75 


1.04 


.35 


- 


.65 


16.19 


38 


8 


Wood worker, 






21.00 


3.25 


.90 


.25 


.50 


.25 


9.39 


39 


9 


City laborer, 






21.50 


3.50 


2.25 


.20 


.25 


- 


13.45 


40 


10 


Cook, 






40.50 


4.00 


.70 


.35 


- 


1.40 


14.45 


41 


4 


Teamster, . 






30.00 


2.50 


1.67 


.22 


- 


.20 


16.30 


42 


9 


Tailor, 






33.00 


3.00 


1.40 


.35 


- 


.30 


12.19 


43 


8 


Bricklayer, 






47.00 


3.50 


1.63 


.31 


- 


1.20 


17.88 



Table 35. — Expenditure for Food of a Family for the Month of March, 
1906, 1907, 1908, 1909 and 1910. (From Family Account Book.) 

[Size of family, four adults; occupation of head of family, profession; standard of living, higher 
than the average, but not extravagant.] 





Amount Spent for Each Article in — 


ARTICLES PURCHASED. 


1906. 


1907. 


1908. 


1909. 


1910. 


Butter, 

Cereals and crackers 

Coffee 

Tea 

Cheese, 

Eggs (estimated) 

Flour 

Fruit, 

Fish, 

Meat, 

Poultry (estimated), .... 

Sugar, 

Vegetables, 

Incidentals, seasonings, nuts, etc., . 


$3.00 
1.60 

.18 
3.30 

.75 
1.72 

.59 
8.58 
3.50 

.62 
2.15 
1.34 


$2.99 
.54 

.60 

.43 

2.66 

4.13 

.63 

10.34 

3.50 
.68 

2.53 

2.07 


$3.60 

1.59 

.70 

.60 

.40 

3.50 

.90 

2.46 

1.11 

12.84 

3.16 

1.13 

3.88 

2.46 


$4.06 
.10 
.35 
.60 

3.30 
1.05 
1.30 
1.00 
7.96 
2.31 
1.10 
3.06 
1.22 


$5.70 

1.18 

.70 

.60 

.22 

3.40 

.95 

2.44 

3.14 

7.55 

4.29 

1.80 

4.84 

' 3.58 


Total, 


27.33 


31.10 


38.33 


27.411 


40.39 



1 Two persons absent two weeks. 



604 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



1. The effort to prevent waste and make greater economies by buy- 
ing in large quantities, using cheaper substitutes, etc., takes much more 
time, energy and thought from the housekeeper. This increased burden 
of the housekeeper must not be overlooked in estimating the effects 
of the increased cost of living upon the family. 

2. Although prices for all objects are not the highest that they have 
been in recent years, the general average of prices is much higher. 

3. These figures show that the effort for economy has affected the 
cost of meat in the menus, but has not been successful in keeping 
down the total cost of food. The increases in the purchases of fish 
products, vegetables, butter and incidentals of food are the results of 
the plan to use less meat. 

4. More butter and sugar has been used in the last two years, be- 
cause cake was made at home. Purchases of cake were not a part of 
the bills that record the expenses of the previous years; $1 might 
fairly be reckoned to this account. 

5. Comparing the cost of meat, fish and poultry and number of pur- 
chases for 1908 and 1910, we find for the same number of original 
purchases : — 

1908. For meat, fish and poultry, 27 orders, $17.11 

1910. For meat, fish and poultry (three vegetarian substitutes), 27 

orders, 17.36 

6. Substitutes for meat included increased use of vegetables, mush- 
rooms, nuts, sweet oil and butter. 



Prices of Sugar and Butter. 
Butter. 



Year. 


Quantity 
(Pounds). 


Cost. 


Price 

per Pound 

(Cents). 


1906 

1907, 

1908, 

1909 

1910 


10 
8 
10 
11 
15 


S3. 00 
2.99 
3.60 
4.06 
5.70 


30 

33,38 

36 

36,37 

38 





Sugar. 






1906 . 




12 


$0.62 


5,6 


1907 




8 


.68 


5V 2 
f 5V 2 >- 


1908, . 




12 


1.13 


7 2 

9' 


1909 




20 


1.10 


5V 2 


1910, . 




30 


1.80 


m 



1 Granulated. 



2 Pulverized. 



Lump. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 605 

Average Menu for March, for Five Years. 

Butter, 10% pounds, at 36 cents a pound, $3.87 

Cereal and crackers, 1.00 

Tea, % pound, at 60 cents a pound, 48 

Coffee, 1 pound, at 35 cents, .35 

Cheese, iy 5 pounds, 22 

Eggs, 9 dozen, at 33 cents a dozen, 2.97 

Flour, 1 bag, 90 

Fruit, 2.00 

Fish, 1.29 

Meat, 9.69 

Poultry, 2.58 

Sugar, 18 pounds, 1.06 

Vegetables, 3.22 

Incidentals, 4.16 



606 COST OF LIVING. [May, 



Appendix C. 



WASTE OF HEALTH. 



[Report prepared for the Massachusetts Commission on the Cost of Living by Mr. Yale Smiley.] 



One of the greatest assets of any country is the vital efficiency of 
its citizens. The relation of this factor to mental and moral efficiency 
is apparent. A well man is more susceptible to the influence of teach- 
ing and preaching than a sick man. Conservation of the physical 
resources of man will aid in conserving the mental and moral energies 
of the citizens of the State. Thus to secure the greatest possible na- 
tional efficiency, economic and moral, it is necessary to reduce to a 
minimum the annual loss through disease. 

Many attempts have been made to enumerate the unnecessary wastes 
of health in the United States. On this subject Prof. J. Pease Norton 
of Yale University writes as follows : — 

There are four great wastes to-day, the more lamentable because they are 
unnecessary. They are: preventable deaths, preventable sickness, prevent- 
able conditions of low physical and mental efficiency and preventable 
ignorance. The magnitude of these wastes is testified to by experts com- 
petent to judge. They play their part in a cruel, devastating destruction 
that is almost incredible to the human mind. 1 

It is of course self-evident that not all deaths can be postponed 
nor all illness prevented; but, from an examination of the available 
statistics, the attempt will be made to illustrate the extent of these 
preventable wastes of health in Massachusetts at the present time, 
and also to draw some conclusions as to the actual amount of these 
wastes that could be prevented in this State if all the methods known 
to physicians and sanitarians were applied in a reasonably efficient 
manner. 

The increased vital efficiency of the citizens of this State which would 
result from a conservation of the present waste of health would, if 
expended in labor, increase the earnings of those whose health is im- 

1 American Association for the Advancement of Science, Ithaca meeting, 1906, p. 299. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 607 

proved and also lessen the burdens of those who are at present un- 
necessarily ill. This increase in earnings would thus tend to reduce 
the cost of living. The earnings of those who were heretofore unable 
to work would increase the total earnings of the citizens of the State, 
and hence make the average income larger. 

There is no direct relation between waste of health and the recent 
rise of prices; nor can it be maintained that there has been any in- 
creased waste of health during the period of rising prices which would 
lower the rate of wages. The effect of a conservation of health, how- 
ever, would be to lower real prices. 

Prices are classified by many economists as real and nominal. The 
former are the prices paid as compared to the prices of other com- 
modities. Thus, if the price of any commodity, say sugar, is raised 
from 5 cents to 7 cents a pound, but there is at the same time a rise 
in the prices of all other commodities, and also in wages, to correspond 
to this rise in the price of sugar, the real price cannot be said to have 
risen. Nominal price, on the other hand, is the actual money price 
paid. Thus, in the case of sugar, mentioned above, the nominal price 
has risen 2 cents a pound, while the real price has remained the same. 

The effect of health conservation would be to lower real prices. The 
increased efficiency of labor would enable the laborer to produce more, 
and hence put him in a position to demand more wages. This rise 
in wages would give the laborer more money to spend, and if all the 
possibilities of conserving health outlined in this report were accom- 
plished, this rise in wages would be sufficient to counterbalance to some 
degree the recent advance of nominal prices of commodities. It is the 
real prices that are the most important. It is what the laborer or 
business man can buy with his income, and not the size of that income, 
that is important. 

The unnecessary loss of life due to tuberculosis is the " preventable 
waste " that has been brought most prominently before the public by 
means of the press and the magazines. State legislatures, municipal 
authorities, insurance companies, charitable organizations and private 
individuals have all aided in the establishment of numerous hospitals, 
camps, laboratories, etc., for the cure and prevention of this dreaded 
disease. Some States have prepared very complete exhibits, showing 
the prevalence of the disease and to what extent it can be prevented 
by the use of proper care. The result of the increased effort to check 
the ravages of this disease in Massachusetts is clearly illustrated in 
Table 1. In spite of the great increase in population, from 1,783,000 
in 1S80 to 3,192,000 in 1908, the number of deaths from tuberculosis 
was greater in 1880 than in 1908, being 6,755 in the former year 
and 6,311 in the latter. The deaths from tuberculosis in all forms per 
1,000 of total deaths fell from 191.4 in 1880 to 121.8 in 1908. Ex- 
pressing this in another manner, the death rate from tuberculosis in 
all forms per 100,000 of population fell from 378.9 in 1880 to 197.7 



608 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



in 1908. From these figures it is evident that the death rate from 
tuberculosis has been reduced about 45 per cent, since 1880. That 
there is room for continued improvement is urged by all those interested 
in any institution for the cure of this disease. The estimates, made 
by those who have studied the subject, of the amount of further pre- 
vention of tuberculosis through better sanitation, anti-spitting or- 
dinances, etc., vary from 75 to more than 90 per cent. 

The attempt will now be made to extend this method of estimating 
the preventability of deaths due to tuberculosis to all deaths from all 
causes, and also to estimate the unnecessary loss of health due to 
preventable illness. In order to discover what can be done, it is neces- 
sary to understand something about vital statistics. 

It has been the impression of many people at different times that 
there is an iron law of mortality; namely, that the average length of 
human life is fixed, and cannot be altered by human action. This 
doctrine has been questioned of late years, and enough statistics have 
been gathered to prove its fallacy. The method of estimating the 
average duration of human life is to take a definite group of persons 
born, find the ages at which they died, and then strike an average. 
To take the average age at death of a random group of people would 
not give accurate results, as the group might contain a large number 
of infants or very old people because of immigration or emigration, 
and the result would not be an index of the average duration of life 
of the total population. 

The oldest estimates of the average duration of life that can be 
accepted as being approximate are those made by Professor Finkeln- 
burg of Bonn 1 and certain records from Geneva. 2 They were as 
follows : — 





Period. 


Bonn. 


Geneva. 


Sixteenth century, 


18 to 20 years. 
No estimate. 
Over 30 years. 
38 to 40 years. 


21.2 years. 


Seventeenth century 

Eighteenth century, 


25.7 years. 
33.6 years. 


Nineteenth century, 


39.7 years. 



The latest estimate of the average length of life in Prussia is about 
42.5 years. The average for Europe is slightly higher than this, being 
about 45 years. 8 

Massachusetts statistics are the best obtainable for estimating the 
length of life in the United States. Wigglesworth estimated the 



1 "Organization der offentl. Gesundheitspflege in den Kulturstaaten," in "Handbuch der 
Hygiene," 1893, quoted by Irving Fisher. 

2 From Mallet, in "Annales d'Hygiene," XVII., p. 169, quoted by Irving Fisher. 

3 Irving Fisher, "Report on National Vitality." 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



609 



average length of life in Massachusetts and New Hampshire to be 
about 35 years in 1789/ Elliott estimated it to be about 40 years 
in Massachusetts in 1S55. 2 Abbott's tables for 1893-97 place the 
average duration of life in Massachusetts at 45 years. 3 

From the figures given above it is easily seen that the length of 
human life is not fixed, and that there has been a steady increase 
in the average duration of life in Massachusetts and also in Europe 
during the past century. Is further prolongation possible? 

This State has fortunately been one of the first to require a com- 
plete registration of deaths and the causes thereof. A report on this 
subject is prepared annually under the direction of the Secretary of 
the Commonwealth. The report for 1908 gives the number of deaths 
during that year as 51,788. 4 

The classification of deaths according to causes for 1908 is as 
follows 5 : — 



us and its adnexa, 



1. General diseases, 

2. Diseases of tbe nervous system and organs of special nerves, 

3. Diseases of the circulatory apparatus, 

4. Diseases of the respiratory apparatus, 

5. Diseases of the digestive apparatus, 

6. Diseases of the genito -urinary apparati 

7. Puerperal state, .... 

8. Diseases of the skin and cellular tissue, 

9. Diseases of the organs of locomotion, 

10. Malformations, .... 

11. Early infancy, .... 

12. Old age, 

13. Affections produced by external causes, 

14. Ill-defined diseases, 



Total, 



14,040 
6,108 
7,050 
7,337 
6,166 
3,017 

357 

202 
64 

258 
3,404 

945 
2,664 

176 

51,788 



The most prominent causes of death in 1908 were 6 : — 

Tuberculosis of lungs, 4,445 

Tuberculosis of other organs, 406 

Cancer, 2,814 

Cerebral congestion and hemorrhage, 2,979 

Meningitis (simple), 845 

Paralysis, 190 

Heart disease, including acute endocarditis, ..... 5,690 

Pneumonia, 4,044 



1 " Memoir of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences," Vol. II., p. 133, quoted by Irving 
Fisher. 

2 "Proceedings American Association for the Advancement of Science," 1857, pp. 61, 69, quoted 
by Irving Fisher. 

3 Thirteenth annual report of the State Board of Health of Massachusetts. 

4 Sixty-seventh report of Births, Marriages and Deaths in Massachusetts, 1908, p. 42. 

5 Ibid., pp. 213, 214. 
« Ibid., pp. 216, 217. 



610 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Bronchitis, 1,212 

Diarrhoea, 3,120 

Nephritis, 1,640 

Bright's disease, 970 

Puerperal septicaemia, 37 

Albuminuria and puerperal eclampsia, 153 

Gangrene, 134 

Affection of the bone (nontubereulous), etc., 62 

Malformations, 258 

Congenital icterus, aclerema, etc., 3,304 

Old age (not a disease), 945 

Accidental traumatism (including 436 eases of suicide), . . . 2,664 

Unspecified causes, 165 

From this list one can readily see the relative importance of these 
diseases as a cause of death. The year 1908 was not marked by any 
great epidemic that would tend to make any of the items greatly out 
of proportion, and it may be taken as a fair average of the present 
relative importance of the various diseases as a cause of death. 

No statistics for estimating the possible postponement of some pro- 
portion of these deaths, through using modern methods of prevention 
and cure in all cases, can be obtained. The only estimates that can 
be given are those made by physicians who have had large experience 
in hospitals and clinical work. The most thorough investigation of this 
question that has ever been made, and also the most recent, was that 
made by Prof. Irving Fisher of Yale University for the National Con- 
servation Commission in 1909, and embodied in his " Report on 
National Vitality." 

Professor Fisher prepared a list of the diseases and other factors 
causing death, under ninety heads. This list was submitted to eighteen 
physicians, all of whom had large opportunity of observation in clini- 
cal and hospital work, and each physician gave his estimate as to the 
extent to which it was possible to postpone death if the best means 
of prevention and cure were pursued in all cases. These estimates 
were often based upon actual hospital records or experience over a 
long period in private practice. The physicians made estimates only 
as to the postponability of deaths from the diseases on which they 
were especially informed. There were, however, at least six estimates 
for each cause of death. Only the more moderate estimates were 
chosen, and a minimum estimate made of the possible percentage of 
postponement of deaths from each cause in the list. The estimates 
for each disease are given in Table 2. These estimates have been sub- 
mitted by a representative of this commission to several authorities, 
and their estimates have all been higher than those of the physicians 
consulted by Professor Fisher. One sanitary engineer claimed that 
typhoid fever could be totally eliminated as a disease by proper diet 
and sanitation, etc. The estimate used in the table was 85 per cent. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 611 

The average of the estimates of possible prevention of all diseases 
was found to be 42.3 per cent. In other words, this means that, in 
the opinion of experts competent to judge, 42.3 per cent, of the deaths 
that occur in the United States each year might be postponed. The 
length of the postponement of death in each case would be the ex- 
pectation of life of the person at the age at which death occurred. 
This means that if a child dies of croup at the age of 2 years, and 
the death could have been prevented if the best known methods of pre- 
vention and cure had been used, this child would then have died at 
the age of 56 years, as the expectation of life (namely, the mean after 
lifetime of persons who reach that age) at 2 years of age is 54 years. 
(See Table 3.) This means that the average person who reaches the 
age of 2 years will live to be 56 years old. Now, to estimate the pos- 
sible prolongation of the average life if 42.3 per cent, of deaths were 
postponable, it is merely necessary to multiply the average expecta- 
tion of life by the ratio of preventability of deaths. Professor Fisher's 
result, obtained by estimating the prolongation effected in respect of 
each cause of death and adding these results, was 14.06 years. 

Applying this estimate of 42.3 per cent, to the average expectation 
of life in Massachusetts in 1900 (see Table 3), which was 29.1 years, 
we get 12.3 years as the possible prolongation of the average life in 
Massachusetts if the best methods of prevention and cure of dis- 
ease were used in all cases in this State. This means that instead of 
the average duration of life in this State being a little over 45 years, 
as it is now, it would be about 58 years. This estimate for Massa- 
chusetts is smaller than that for the whole country, made by Professor 
Fisher, because Massachusetts is already in advance of most States in 
health matters, and also because the average was used to apply the 
estimate to Massachusetts, while the estimate for the whole country 
was worked out more accurately by Professor Fisher by calculating 
the prolongation of life due to the possible saving that could be effected 
for each of the ninety causes and then adding them. This method 
gives the proper " weight " to each cause. 

These results will doubtless seem startling to the reader who has not 
made any study of the question of the possible preservation of health, 
but it should be remembered that these are the minimum estimates of 
some of the best-informed men in the United States on these subjects. 
A conversation with the family physician will enable one to verify the 
fairness of these estimates with reference to any of the diseases with 
which the physician in question is most acquainted. 

The shortening of the average lifetime because of carelessness and 
ignorance is not the only loss due to want of care of the health. Sick- 
ness is also an economic loss to the State of no small amount. Serious 
illness is taken to be illness of such a nature that it prevents a person 
from doing any work. Various estimates have been made as to the 
loss of time because of serious illness. The most satisfactory of these 



612 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

is that made by William Farr. 1 His estimate is. that corresponding to 
each death in a community there are a little more than two years of 
illness; in other words, that there are about two persons seriously ill 
during the year to each person that dies in the course of the year. 
Applying this estimate to the number of deaths in Massachusetts in 
the year 1908, we have a total of 103,576 persons seriously ill in the 
State throughout that year. This would mean that on the average at 
least two weeks are lost each year by each inhabitant of the State be- 
cause of serious illness. 

That this is a very conservative estimate is borne out by the facts 
discovered by the medical inspectors of school children in 1906-07. 
This inspection covered at the time only 76 per cent, of the average 
membership of the public schools of the State. The number of chil- 
dren reported as suffering from disease or defects was as follows 2 : — 

Diphtheria, 238 

Scarlet fever, 313 

Measles, 637 

Whooping cough, 973 

Mumps, 367 

Chicken pox, f . 548 

Influenza, 276 

Syphilis, 36 

Tuberculosis, - . . . . 115 

Erysipelas, 17 

Adenoids, . 2,525 

Other diseases of oral and respiratory tract, .... 5,103 

Otitis, 407 

Other diseases of ear, 363 

Conjunctivitis, 779 

Other diseases of eye, 2,159 

Scabies, 1,054 

Pediculosis, 7,691 

Impetigo contagiosa, 1,568 

Eingworm, ............ 715 

Other diseases of the skin, 1,170 

Chorea, 105 

Epilepsy, 41 

Deformities (spinal and extremities), 142 

Total, 27,242 

As this inspection covered only 76 per cent, of the average member- 
ship, this is the number of diseases and defects discovered among 
335,000 children. This means that more than 8 per cent, of the chil- 



i "Vital Statistics," p. 513. 

2 George H. Martin, "School Hygiene in Massachusetts," p. 13, reprinted from the seventy- 
first annual report of the Massachusetts Board of Education. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 613 

dren in the public schools suffered from diseases or defects during 
the school year 1906-07. 

The statistics for the closure of schools during the school year 
1906-07 show the extent of serious illness in another light. George 
H. Martin, secretary of the Board of Education, writes as follows 1 : — 

In consequence of the presence of some infectious disease, chiefly diph- 
theria, scarlet fever or measles, during the school year of 1906-07, 318 
schoolrooms were closed and classes dismissed. These rooms were in 70 
towns. The classes included 12,122 children. The closure lasted from one 
day to four weeks. The waste of money involved in the cessation of work 
for days or weeks of more than 300 teachers and the loss of schooling 
suffered by the 12,000 children is a matter of no small moment; but what 
we may read into the statistics of diseases and defects not numerous or 
serious enough to cause the closure of the school is of much greater moment. 

The amount of serious illness that could be prevented must again 
be left to the opinions of physicians. It is a safe conclusion, however, 
that if 42.3 per cent, of the annual deaths can be postponed, a still 
larger proportion of serious illness can be prevented. We may safely 
assume that, if the best methods of prevention and cure were used in 
all cases of serious illness, at least 50 per cent, could be prevented. 
That this is a conservative estimate is attested to by the fact that the 
second annual medical inspection in the schools of this State showed 
that there had been a reduction of 20 per cent, in the number of 
children with defective eyes and ears, because of the first medical 
inspection of school children. 2 Further inspection and instruction of 
the children in the proper care of these organs may be expected to 
lower the number suffering from these causes much more than 50 per 
cent, below that found to exist before medical inspection was 
established. 

In addition to those suffering from serious illness in the State there 
are also many suffering from minor ailments. Mr. Martin speaks of 
these troubles among school children as follows 3 : — 

The amount of physical pain and discomfort caused by the various diseases 
of the eye and ear, by adenoids, by itch and lice and St. Vitus' dance, is 
enough to account for a large part of the inattention and restlessness, the 
slowness and -the dulness which prevail in the schools. 

One basis of estimating the amount of illness due to these complaints 
is in statistics of school attendance. This will reveal only a part of 
the amount of these troubles, as many of them are not sufficient to 

1 George H. Martin, "School Hygiene in Massachusetts," p. 13, reprinted from the seventy- 
first annual report of the Massachusetts Board of Education. 

2 George H. Martin, " Medical Inspection," pp. 5, 6, reprinted from the seventy-second annual 
report of the Massachusetts Board of Education. 

8 George H. Martin, "School Hygiene in Massachusetts," pp. 13, 14, reprinted from the sev- 
enty-first annual report of the Massachusetts Board of Education. 



614 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

keep children from attending school. The average attendance in the 
public schools of Massachusetts for the school year 1907-08 was 92 
per cent, of the enrolled attendance. 1 As a pupil is stricken from the 
rolls after an absence of ten days, this absence is confined for the most 
part to minor ailments and truancy. A conservative estimate of the 
time lost by the pupils in the public schools of this State because of 
minor ailments would be about 5 per cent, of the school year for each 
student enrolled. As there were 466,214 enrolled students in the public 
schools of the State in 1907-08, 1 this means that 23,310 students were 
constantly ill enough to be kept from school because of minor ailments. 
It is probable that this estimate is also a very conservative one for 
the prevalence of minor ailments among people of all ages. The pos- 
sibility of prevention of these ailments is a subject of conjecture. If 
a knowledge of how to cure and prevent these minor ailments were 
widely distributed among citizens of the State, so that every one 
would know just how to avoid these troubles, we might hope to reduce 
greatly the number of these complaints. As the loss of time each 
year, according to the above estimate of 5 per cent., because of minor 
ailments, amounts to more than two weeks for each person in the 
State, it is plain to be seen that the economic value of the increased 
time that could be spent in work, if these ailments were prevented, 
would be enormous. 

We might reasonably suppose that a person who is not seriously ill 
and is troubled with no minor ailments is a "well" man; but this- 
cannot be assumed. There is a great difference between being well 
and having endurance. The trained athlete can perform feats of strength 
and endurance that startle the average man. The difference between 
being " in training " and being " out of condition " is that the former 
state is the natural state that one would be in if he took good care of 
his body, while the latter is an abnormal state caused by indulging 
in some form of excess. It is natural for man to be " well," if he is 
careful to get plenty of sleep, regulates his diet and exercises his mental 
and physical powers each day. Sanitary chemists have shown that 
improper diet is as harmful as is the drinking of alcohol. The present 
tendency among chemists and physiologists is to advise a lessening 
of the amount of protein eaten. This means, practically, a lessening 
of the amount of eggs and lean meat eaten. It is now recognized that 
one can eat nearly anything that he likes, as long as the amount eaten 
is not excessive. The most common-sense attitude that can be adopted 
in order to increase the general health and endurance and avoid dis- 
ease is to use ordinary care in the choice of food, especially as to its 
cleanliness and purity, chew it thoroughly, get plenty of sleep and take 
exercise each day. If every one would follow these simple rules, we 

1 Seventy-second annual report of the Massachusetts Board of Education, p. xcii. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 615 

could look for an increased vital efficiency that would add materially 
to the size of the annual income of the average citizen. 

An interesting question in regard to over-exertion is in relation to 
the proper length of the working day. From the few experiments that 
have been made, it cannot be concluded that a shorter working day 
will produce a greater product, but it may at least be assumed that 
there is room for improvement of industrial conditions affecting the 
health of the laborer, which can be accomplished through a hearty 
co-operation between the employer and employed to discover the length 
of working day in each particular trade that will produce the maximum 
efficiency. 

The amount of undue fatigue among all classes of workers in the 
United States is enormous. It is a well-known fact that we live at 
a faster and more wearing rate than any other nation on the earth. 
Professor Fisher believes, after a thorough study, that 5 per cent, of 
the population of the United States is suffering from total impairment 
of their working powers because of undue fatigue. 1 This undue fatigue 
is the waste of health that is most easily preventable, as compared with 
the other wastes mentioned. All that needs to be done is to take proper 
care of the body. Physical training of all kinds should be encouraged, 
and will be found to increase the endurance of the average man with 
astonishing rapidhVy. TVell-enforced laws as to the hours of labor 
are essential to help prevent this waste. There is a secondary effect 
of undue fatigue that should be realized, — it increases susceptibility 
to disease. Thus, to prevent a large proportion of serious illness and 
death it is merely necessary to strengthen the physical endurance 
in order to lessen the possibility of becoming unduly fatigued. 

This completes the list of the wastes of health in this State. The 
natural inquiry is, how to remedy this condition. The recommendations 
of Professor Fisher to the Conservation Commission are given on 
pp. 624, 5, 6. Many of these suggestions have already been adopted in 
Massachusetts. Those that have not been adopted should be studied 
carefully. It is only through an awakened public interest, causing in- 
dividual effort along these lines and forcing wise legislation, that these 
enormous possible savings of health can be effected. 

So far the attempt has been to show the amount of illness, death, 
etc., due to all causes, and the percentage of this loss that might be 
prevented if proper methods were used for prevention and cure 
throughout the State. Some of the things that can be done to lessen 
this loss have been enumerated. In order that the extent of this loss 
may be more fully realized, a money estimate of the waste of health 
in this State will be made. This money loss is small compared to the 
mental and physical pain and suffering caused by this unnecessary 
waste of vital efficiency. But it is the economic side of the question 

1 Irving Fisher, "Report on National Vitality," p. 47. 



616 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

that is important in this investigation, as it is the one which has an 
influence upon the cost of living. 

No money estimate can be placed on the economic value of the 
individual human life. But it is possible to calculate with considerable 
accuracy the average economic value of a large number of lives. There 
have been many estimates made upon this basis. The usual method 
is to estimate the income that will be received by the average man, 
and deduct from this the cost of caring for him during infancy and 
old age. This net income is capitalized, and the value of the average 
life at different ages is found. This is the basis upon which William 
Fair estimated the value of the average human life at various ages. 1 
Professor Fisher has worked out Farr's table on the basis of the 
average earnings of labor in the United States, and has estimated: (1) 
that the average economic value of each of the inhabitants of the 
United States is $2,900; (2) that the average economic value of lives 
now sacrificed by postponable deaths is $1,700. 2 It should be remem- 
bered that these are valuations for the average life, and not estimates 
of yearly income. 

By applying these estimates to the statistics of deaths in Massachu- 
setts in 1908, it is possible to realize the enormous money loss to the 
citizens of the State because of the failure to conserve the vital effi- 
ciency of the citizens in the best possible manner. 

The estimated population of Massachusetts in 1908 was 3,192,192. 3 
Multiplying this by the average value of the lives of the inhabitants 
of the State, $2,900, we get $9,257,336,800 as a minimum estimate of 
the vital assets of Massachusetts in 1908. This is in excess of the total 
wealth of the State. 

Taking 42 per cent, as the percentage of deaths that might be post- 
poned in this State and applying it to the number of deaths in the 
State in 1908 (51,788), we get 21,906 as the number of deaths that 
might have been postponed in 1908 if the best methods of prevention 
and cure were used in all cases. Using the above-mentioned figure of 
$1,700 as the economic value of each of these lives, we find that the 
loss to the State because of preventable deaths was $37,240,200 in 
1908. 

We have next to estimate the loss to the State and also to the citizens 
because of serious illness in the State that could have been prevented. 
It has been shown that there were approximately 103,576 persons 
seriously ill in Massachusetts throughout the year 1908. It is probable 
that most of these people were above the average in age, as sickness 
tends to increase with age. A rough estimate, based on various sta- 
tistics, shows that about one-third of these people would be in the 

i William Fair, "Vital Statistics," p. 536. 

2 Irving Fisher, "Report on National Vitality," p. 119. 

3 Estimate of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor. 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 617 

working period of life. 1 This would amount to 34,525 persons in this 
State in 1908. Of these, it is probable that only about three-fourths 
actually worked when well, the remainder being supported by others 
or by income from capital. This would amount to 25,893 persons 
in this State in 1908. Estimating the average earnings of these people 
to be $525 a year, which is conservative, the loss in earnings because 
of serious illness in this State in 1908 was $13,593,825. 

Another economic loss is the cost of medical attendance, drugs, 
nursing, etc. The United States Commissioner of Labor estimated in 
1903 that the cost per family among workingmen for illness and death 
was $27 per annum. 2 As there were about 600,000 families in this 
State in 1908, the minimum loss from this source would be $16,200,000. 
The sum of loss of wages and cost of medical attendance, nursing, etc., 
will give an estimate of the economic loss because of sickness in the 
State in 1908. This would amount to $29,793,825. We have already 
estimated that 50 per cent, is a minimum estimate of the possible ratio 
of preventability of serious illness. This would mean a saving of 
$14,896,912.50 in 1908. 

No calculation can be made as to the loss of wages because of drunk- 
enness, undue fatigue, colds, etc.; but it is apparent, from estimates 
of the extent of these ailments, that they amount to more than the 
loss because of serious illness. The saving that could be effected if 
the suggestions outlined herein were fully carried out would probably 
amount to more than the savings that could be effected along all other 
lines. 

A summary of the estimated loss to the State because of preventable 
deaths and serious illness in 1908 is as follows : — 

21,906 postponable deaths, valued at $1,700 each, . . $37,240,200.00 
25,893 persons seriously ill during year, 50 per cent, of 
whose illness could be prevented, who would 
earn $525 each during the year, if well, . 6,796,912.50 
$16,200,000 cost of illness, 50 per cent, preventable, . . 8,100,000.00 

Total, ...'.... $52,137,112.50 

The size of these figures will probably make them seem absurd to 
one who has never thought about this matter. To say that $50,000,000 
could be saved yearly and that 12.3 years could be added to the 
average lifetime seems startling. Yet it should be remembered that 
these estimates are constructed on the basis of minimum estimates made 
by some of the most eminent physicians in the United States. If the 
maximum estimates had been used, these figures would be two or three 
times as large. The general conclusion, that there is an enormous waste 
of health in this State at the present time, cannot be questioned. 

1 William Fair, "Vital Statistics," p. 510, quoted by Irving Fisher. 

2 Eighteenth Annual Report, p. 509. 



618 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Supplementary Data concerning Waste of Health. 
Table 1. — Deaths in Massachusetts from Tuberculosis, 1849-1906. } 



Year ok Ten-year Periods. 


Midyear 
Population. 2 


Number of 
Deaths from 
Tuberculosis 

(All Forms). 


Death Rate 

for 
Tuberculosis 

(All Forms) 
per 100,000 of 

Population. 


Deaths from 
Tuberculosis 
(All Forms) 

per 

1,000 of Total 

Deaths. 


1849 


965,000 


4,215 


436.8 


206.4 


1850, 












994,000 


4,153 


417.8 


250.1 


1860, 












1,231,000 


5,519 


448.3 


239.2 


1870, 












1,457,000 


5,879 


403.5 


215.1 


1880, 












1,783,000 


6,755 


378.9 


191.4 


1890, 












2,239,000 


7,332 


327.5 


168.4 


1900, 












2,805,000 


7,067 


251.9 


138.1 


1901, 












2,844,000 


6,670 


234.5 


138.2 


1902, 












2,883,000 


6,370 


221.0 


134.1 


1903, 












2,923,000 


6,130 


209.7 


125.0 


1904, 












2,963,000 


6,453 


217.8 


133.1 


1905, 












3,004,000 


6,457 


214.9 


127.9 


1906, 












3,045,000 


6,482 


212.9 


128.0 


1908, 












3,192,0003 


6,311 « 


197.7 


121.8 


1851-1860, 










1,133,000 


5,324 


469.9 


251.5 


1861-1870, 










1,316,000 


5,408 


410.9 


312.0 


1871-1880, 










1,651,000 


6,463 


391.5 


197.9 


1881-1890, 










1,997,000 


7,276 


364.3 


185.9 


1891-1900, 










2,537,000 


7,186 


283.2 


149.8 


1901-1906, 










2,944,000 


6,427 


218.3 


131.0 







1 Mortality Statistics, United States Census, 1907, p. 509. 

2 As stated to nearest thousand in international statistics compiled by French government 
(Statistique ge"nerale de la France, 1907). 

3 Estimate of Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor. 

4 Sixty-seventh annual report of Births, Marriages and Deaths in Massachusetts, 1908, p. 44. 



The following;, with accompanying table, is taken from Irving 
Fisher's "Report on National Vitality." The matter enclosed in 
brackets is inserted by the writer to explain the terms used. 



The table is based on the causes of death given in the census volume for 
mortality statistics for 1906. These causes are arranged according to the 
average, or rather median [i.e., the age such that one-half of the deaths occur 
earlier and one-half later than this age] age at death from the disease. 
This median age is given in the second column. The order in this column 
shows at a glance the successive onslaught of, or rather fatality from, the 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 619 

various causes of death. The table shows the successive bombardments of 
disease to which human life is subject. 

The third column gives the average lost " expectation of life," that is, 
the expectation cut off by each particular cause of death. 

The fourth column represents the percentage which the deaths from each 
particular cause bear to the total number of deaths in 1906 in the registra- 
tion area [i.e., the States having registration of deaths in the United States]. 
It shows the relative importance of the different causes of death in the 
present death rate, but has no reference to the age at death. 

The fifth column contains an estimate, made by physicians, of the ratio 
of preventability from each cause named. 

The items in the sixth column are found by multiplying together those in 
the fourth and fifth columns, and express the percentage which the prevent- 
able deaths from each cause named bears to the total number of deaths from 
all causes. 

The seventh and last column gives the figures for which the table is con- 
structed, namely, the amount of prolongation of life which would come about 
through preventing deaths according to the ratios of preventability in column 
5. When it is said that a death is preventable, it is not, of course, meant 
that the person saved from it will never die, but merely that his death is 
postponed. The term " postponable " would avoid a great deal of confusion 
on the subject. 

The principle on which the last column is constructed is simply the prin- 
ciple of averages. The column shows the prolongation of life which would be 
caused by postponing the " postponable " deaths by the amounts indicated 
in column 3. To illustrate this principle, suppose ten magnitudes to be 
averaged arithmetically, and that their average is thirty. To fix our ideas, 
we may suppose these ten magnitudes to be represented by ten lines drawn 
on a sheet of paper. It is evident that if one of these ten lines is pro- 
longed the average of the ten will be thereby increased by exactly one-tenth 
of the prolongation of that one line. 



620 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Table 2. — Possible Prolongation of Life in the United States. 





TO 
<B 
TO 

o3 
O 


< 

a 


T5 

a 

03 


of Preventability (Postpon- 
i. e., Ratio of " Prevent- 
eaths from Cause named to 
bs from Cause named. 


*0><J 

K 


M& O 

|ll 




o 


o> 


a 


> o> 


O »o3 


Cause of Death. 


TO 

Q 


3 

o3 

«2 

"o 
a 
.2 


TO't? 

up 

OS 

■§* 

w 0> 


sa . 

Qj 03 to 

- fl 0) 

5 M TO 


. Years added t 
if Deaths were 
ilatio of Preven 
5. 




■S,M 


o 


.S'^Q'S 


Q m ^ 


= B.E 
Lifetime 
in the . 
Column 




*! 

. a 




Is 

Q 5 

M o> 


+s >»„ 0> 

• c3 o3<1 


d£3 

,, 03 03 
o> o> 




< 


ffl 


O 


Q 


H 


fe 


1. Premature birth, 




50 


2.00 


40 


.80 


.40 


2. Congenital malformation of heart (cyano- 

sis). 

3. Congenital malformation other than of 




50 


.55 


- 


- 


- 




50 


.30 


_ 


_ 


_ 


heart. 














4. Congenital debility 




50 


2.30 


40 


.92 


.46 


5. Hydrocephalus 




50 


.10 


- 


- 


- 


6. Venereal diseases, 




50 


.30 


70 


.21 


.11 


7. Diarrhoea and enteritis, .... 




50 


7.74 


60 


4.64 


2.32 


8. Measles, 




50 


.80 


40 


.32 


.16 


9. Acute bronchitis, . . ... 




50 


1.10 


30 


.33 


.17 


10. Broncho-pneumonia, 




50 


2.40 


50 


1.20 


.60 


11. Whooping cough, 




50 


.90 


40 


.36 


.18 


12. Croup, . . . • . 


2 


54 


.30 


75 


.22 


.12 


13. Meningitis 


2 


54 


1.60 


70 


1.12 


.60 


14. Diseases of larynx other than laryngitis, . 


3 


54 


.07 


40 


.03 


.02 


15. Laryngitis 


3 


54 


.06 


40 


.02 


.01 


16. Diphtheria, 


3 


54 


1.40 


70 


.98 


.53 


17. Scarlet fever, 


3 


54 


.50 


50 


.25 


.14 


18. Diseases of lymphatics 


5 


54 


.01 


20 


.002 


.001 


19. Tonsilitis 


8 


52 


.05 


45 


.02 


.01 


20. Tetanus, 


8 


52 


.19 


80 


.15 


.08 


21. Tuberculosis other than of the lungs, 


23 


40 


.17 


75 


.13 


.05 


22. Abscess, 

23. Appendicitis, 


24 


39 


.08 


60 


.05 


.02 


24 


39 


.70 


50 


.35 


.14 


24. Typhoid fever, 


26 


38 


2.00 


85 


1.70 


.65 


25. Puerperal convulsions, .... 


28 


371 


.20 


30 


.06 


.02 


26. Puerperal septicaemia, .... 


28 


37i 


.40 


85 


.34 


.13 


27. Other causes incident to childbirth, . 


31 


35i 


.36 


50 


.18 


.06 


28. Diseases of tubes 


31 


35i 


.10 


65 


.06 


.02 



Expectation for females. 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



621 



Table 2. — Possible Prolongation of Life in the United States — Con. 





8 

m 

3 

6 
s 


6 
to 
< 



.3 
"5 


S3 

o 

s 

a 


(Postpon- 
Prevent- 
named to 
med. 


ventable" 
ed to All 


fcc"o"o 

""IS 




co 




il 


ility 
of ' 
ause 
3e na 


- "- 1 CO 


o 5 ^ 

§1° 


Cause of Death. 


o 

Q 


«2 


S 3 


'ventab 

Ratio 

from C 

m Cau 








a 
.9 

"eS 
o 


a! 


o of Pre 
), %. e.. 
Deaths 
aths frc 


E. Yeu 
le if D 
Ratio 
n 5. 




-si 

. a 


O. 


IS 


. Rati 
ability 
able" 
All De 


. = c. 

Death? 
Death* 


= B. 

Lifetin 
in the 
Colum 




< 


« 


o 


O 


H 


ft 


29. Peritonitis, 


31 


34 


.50 


55 


.28 


.10 


30. Smallpox 


32 


34 


.01 


75 


.01 


.003 


31. Tuberculosis of lungs, .... 


33 


33 


9.90 


75 


7.42 


2.45 


32. Violence 


34 


32 


7.50 


35 


2.70 


.86 


33. Malarial fever, 


34 


32 


.20 


80 


.16 


.05 


34. Septicaemia, 


34 


32 


.30 


40 


.12 


.04 


35. Epilepsy, 


35 


32 


.29 


- 






36. General, ill-defined and unknown causes 


35 


31 


9.20 


30 


2.75 


.85 


(including "heart failure," "dropsy" 














and "convulsions"). 














37. Erysipelas 


37 


30 


.30 


60 


.18 


.05 


38. Pneumonia (lobar and unqualified), . 


37 


30 


7.00 


45 


3.15 


.94 


39. Acute nephritis, 


39 


29 


.60 


30 


.18 


.05 


40. Pleurisy 


42 


27 


.27 


55 


.15 


.04 


41. Acute yellow atrophy of liver, . 


42 


27 


.02 


- 


- 


_ 


42. Obstruction of intestines 


43 


26 


.60 


25 


.15 


.0, 


43. Alcoholism, 


44 


26 


.40 


85 


.34 


.09 


44. Hemorrhage of lungs, .... 


45 


25 


.10 


80 


.08 


.02 


45. Diseases of thyroid body 


46 


24 


.02 


10 


.002 


.0005 


46. Ovarian tumor, 


46 


25i 


.07 


- 


- 


- 


47. Uterine tumor, 


46 


25i 


.10 


60 


.06 


.02 


48. Rheumatism 


47 


23 


.50 


10 


.05 


.01 


49. Gangrene of lungs, . 


48 


23 


.03 


- 


- 


- 


50. Anaemia, leucaemia, 


48 


23 


.40 


50 


.20 


.05 


51. Chronic poisonings, 


48 


23 


.05 


70 


.03 


.007 


52. Congestion of lungs, 


49 


22 


.40 


50 


.20 


.04 


53. Ulcer of stomach, 


49 


22 


.20 


50 


.10 


.02 


54. Carbuncle 


49 


22 


.03 


50 


.015 


.003 


55. Pericarditis, 


52 


20 


.10 


10 


.01 


.002 


56. Cancer of female genital organs, 


52 


21i 


.60 


- 


- 


- 



Expectation for females. 



622 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Table 2. — Possible Prolongation of Life in the United States — Con. 





m 
tn 

3 


6 

bO 
< 


§ 
"d 


s-li 


3 


tons'** 
M <D ° 
03 +s 

2a>, 




03 

o 


a 

03 


a 

03 

a 




ss 


0> <s -J? 




a 

o 


0> 


g^g 


H 


<j <0'X 
o A S 




M 


S 


<D 2 


S^sS 


£§,» 


■** a> a 




OS 


3 


00 rQ 

3-g 


s°Sa 


5 « 8 




Cause of Death. 


1 

Q 


a 
.2 




of Preventab 

i. e., Ratio 

eaths from C 

;hs from Caui 




. Years add< 
if Deaths ^ 
Ratio of Pre 
5. 




.2^ 
. el 


o 

a 


18 

.Pn 


. Ratio 
ability), 
able" D 
All Deal 


d£3 
II s J 


. = B. E 

Lifetime 
in the '. 
Column 




< 


m 


O 


Q 


w 


fe 


57. Dysentery, 


52 


20 


.50 


80 


.40 


.08 


58. Gastritis, .... 






53 


19 


.65 


50 


.32 


.06 


59. Cholera nostras, . 






53 


19 


.09 


50 


.05 


.01 


60. Cirrhosis of liver, 






54 


19 


.90 


60 


.54 


.10 


61. General paralysis of insane, 






55 


18 


.30 


75 


.22 


.04 


62. Hydatid tumors of liver, . 






55 


18 


.002 


75 


.002 


.0003 


63. Endocarditis, 






56 


17 


.80 


25 


.20 


.03 


64.|Locomotor ataxia, 








56 


17 


.17 


35 


.06 


.01 


65. Diseases of veins, 








57 


17 


.04 


40 


.02 


.003 


66. Cancer of breast, 








58 


171 


.40 


- 


- 


- 


67. Diabetes, . 








58 


16 


.80 


10 


.08 


.01 


68. Biliary calculi, . 








58 


16 


.17 


40 


.07 


.01 


69. Hernia, 








59 


16 


.27 


70 


.19 


.03 


70. Cancer not specified, 








59 


16 


.90 


- 


- 


- 


71. Tumor, 








59 


16 


.08 


- 


- 


- 


72. Bright's disease, . 








59 


16 


5.60 


40 


2.24 


.36 


73. Embolism and thrombosis, 






60 


15 


.26 


- 


- 


- 


74. Cancer of intestines, . 






60 


15 


.50 


- 


- 


- 


75. Cancer of stomach and liver, 






61 


14 


1.70 


- 


- 


- 


76. Calculi of urinary tract, 






61 


14 


.03 


10 


.003 


.0004 


77. Cancer of mouth, 






63 


13 


.10 


- 


- 


- 


78. Heart disease, 






63 


13 


8.10 


25 


2.02 


.26 


79. Influenza 






64 


13 


.70 


50 


.35 


.05 


80. Asthma and emphysema, . 






64 


13 


.23 


30 


.07 


.009 


81. Angina pectoris, . 






65 


12 


.40 


25 


.10 


.01 


82. Apoplexy, .... 






67 


11 


4.40 


35 


1.54 


.17 


83. Cancer of skin, . 






70 


10 


.20 


- 


- 


- 


84. Chronic bronchitis, 






71 


9 


.80 


30 


.24 


.02 


85. Paralysis, .... 






71 


9 


1.00 


50 


.50 


.04 



Expectation for females. 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



623 



Table 2. — Possible Prolongation of Life in the United States — Con. 





_ 




<n 




- — 


a> — .<— 




a> 
tn 


M 


c3 


o^l 


£< 


M £ o 




3 


< 




S,®^ 


a . 


fe >> 




















.8 

-5 


S 

a 


(Pos 
'Pre 
nam 
med 


a 




Cause of Death. 


2 

02 

A 
"cS 

Q 

<0 £ 
■< (0 


8 

a 
.9 


1% 

s§ 

,9 J 


o of Preventability 
i, i. e., Ratio of 
Deaths from Cause 
aths from Cause na 


22 • 

- H U 


E. Years added t 
le if Deaths were 
Ratio of Prevent 
n 5. 




^"S 


a 


1| 




655 


Lifetin 
in the 
Colum 






W 


.ft 


. R 

abil 
able 
All 


,, o3 03 

CO 

".QP 




< 


pq 


O 


Q 


H 


h 


86. Softening of brain, 


71 


9 


.20 


- 


- 


- 


87. Diseases of arteries, 


73 


9 


.83 


10 


.08 


.007 


88. Diseases of bladder, 


74 


8 


.20 


45 


.09 


.007 


89. Gangrene, 


74 


8 


.25 


60 


.15 


.01 


90. Old age 


83 


5 


2.00 


- 


- 


- 


All causes, 


38 


- 


100.00 


42.3 


42.30 


14.06 


Resume. 














Diseases of infancy (having median age 1), . 


- 


- 


18.50 


47 


8.80 


4.40 


Diseases of childhood (having median age 2 


_ 


_ 


4.20 


67 


2.80 


1.51 


to 8). 














Diseases of middle age (having median age 23 


- 


- 


43.00 


49 


21.20 


6.82 


to 49). 














Disease of late life (having median age 52 to 83), 


" 


" 


34.30 


28 


9.50 


1.33 


All causes, 


- 


- 


100.00 


42.3 


42.30 


14.06 



Table 3. — Expectation of Life in Massachusetts, 1900} 



Age Years. 


Expectation 

Years. 


Age Years. 


Expectation 
Years. 





44.29 


40 


27.49 


1, 














53.13 


45, 












23.89 


2, 














54.64 


50, 












20.57 


3, 














54.69 


55, 












17.25 


4, 














54.42 


60, 












14.48 


5, 














53.90 


65, 












11.70 


10, 














50.15 


70, 












9.69 


15, 














45.79 


75, 












7.68 


20, 














41.79 


80, 












6.57 


25, 














38.23 


85, 












5.46 


30, 














34.66 


90, 












3.98 


35, 














31.09 


95, 












2.50 



Bulletin 15 of the United States Census Bureau, p. 23. 



624 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Irving Fisher, in his " Report on National Vitality," suggests the 
following things which need to be done in order that American vitality 
may reach its maximum development : — 

1. The national government, the States and the municipalities should 
steadfastly devote their energies and resources to the protection of the 
people from disease. Such protection is quite as properly a governmental 
function as is protection from foreign invasion, from criminals or from fire. 
It is both bad policy and bad economy to leave this work mainly to the 
weak and spasmodic efforts of charity or to the philanthropy of physicians. 

2. The national government should exercise at least three public health 
functions: first, investigation; second, dissemination of information; third, 
administration. 

It should remove the reproach that more pains are now taken to protect 
the health of farm cattle than of human beings. It should provide more 
and greater laboratories for research in preventive medicine and public 
hygiene. Provision should also be made for better and more universal vital 
statistics, without which it is impossible to know the exact conditions in an 
epidemic, or, in general, the sanitary or insanitary conditions in any part 
of the country. It should aim, as should State and municipal legislation, to 
procure adequate registration of births, statistics of which are at present 
lacking throughout the United States. 

The national government should prevent transportation of disease from 
State to State in the same way as it now provides for foreign quarantine 
and the protection of the nation from the importation of disease by foreign 
immigrants. It should provide for the protection of the passenger in 
interstate railway travel from infection by his fellow passengers and from 
insanitary conditions in sleeping cars, etc. 

It should enact suitable legislation providing against pollution of interstate 
streams. 

It should provide for the dissemination of information in regard to the 
prevention of tuberculosis and other diseases, the dangers of impure air, 
impure foods, impure milk, imperfect sanitation, ventilation, etc. Just as 
now the Department of Agriculture supplies specific information to the 
farmer in respect to raising crops or live stock, so should one of the 
departments, devoted principally to health and education, be able to provide 
every health officer, school teacher, employer, physician and private family 
with specific information in regard to public, domestic and personal hygiene. 

It should provide for making the national capital into a model sanitary 
city, free from insanitary tenements and workshops, air pollution, water 
pollution, food pollution, etc., with a rate of death and a rate of illness 
among infants and among the population generally so low and so free from 
epidemics of typhoid or other diseases as will arouse the attention of the 
entire country and the world. 

There should be a constant adaptation of pure-food laws to changing con- 
ditions. Meat inspection and other inspection should be so arranged as to 
protect not only foreigners, but our own citizens. The existing health 
agencies of the government should be concentrated in one department, better 
co-ordinated and given more powers and appropriations. 

3. State boards of health and State legislation should provide for the 
regulation of labor of women, should make physiological conditions for 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 625 

women's work, and prevent their employment before and after childbirth; 
should regulate the age at which children shall be employed, make reasonable 
regulations in regard to hours of labor and against the dangers in hazardous 
trades, and especially against the particular dangers of dust and poisonous 
chemicals; should make regulations for sanitation and provide inspection 
of factories, schools, asylums, prisons and other public institutions. Where 
municipalities have not the powers to enact the legislation above mentioned 
with reference to local conditions, the necessary legislation or authority 
should be provided by the State; or where, by reason of the small size of 
the town no efficient local action is possible, the State should exercise the 
necessary functions. It should in such cases advise and supervise local boards 
of health. It should have an engineering department, and advise regarding 
the construction of sewers and water supplies. Pollution of such supplies, 
unless entirely local, should be prevented by the State, which should be 
equipped with laboratories for the analysis of water, milk and other foods. 
Suitable legislation should be passed regulating the sale of drugs, especially 
preparations containing cocaine, opium or alcohol. Legislation — not too 
far in advance of public sentiment needed to enforce it — should be passed 
regulating the sale of alcoholic beverages. State registrations of births, 
deaths and cases of illness should be much more general and efficient than 
at present. 

4. Municipal boards of health need to have more powers and greater 
appropriations; less political interference and better-trained health officers; 
more support in public opinion. Their ordinances in regard to expectora- 
tion, notifications of infectious diseases, etc., should be better enforced by 
the police departments. 

More legislation should be advocated, passed and enforced, to the end that 
streets may be kept clean; garbage properly removed; sewage properly dis- 
posed of; air pollution of all kinds prevented, whether by smoke, street dust, 
noxious gases or any other source; noises should be lessened. 

Municipalities need also to take measures to prevent infection being 
carried by flies, mosquitoes, other insects and vermin, and by prostitution. 
They need to guard with greater care the water supply, and in many cases 
to filter it; they should make standards for milk purity, and enforce them; 
they should also regularly inspect other foods exposed for sale; they should 
provide for sanitary inspection of local slaughterhouses, dairies, shops, 
lodging and boarding houses and other establishments within the power of 
the particular municipality; they should make and enforce stricter building 
laws, especially as relating to tenements, to the end that dark-room tenements 
may be eliminated, and all tenements be provided with certain minimum 
standard requirements as to light, air and sanitary arrangements. 

5. School children should be medically inspected and school hygiene 
universally practiced. This involves better protection against school epi- 
demics; better ventilation, light and cleanliness of the schoolroom; the dis- 
covery and correction of adenoids, eye strain and nervous strain generally;- 
and the provision for playgrounds. Sound scientific hygiene should be taught 
in all schools, public, private, normal and technical, as also in colleges and 
universities. 

6. The curricula of medical schools should be rearranged, with a greater 
emphasis on prevention and on the training of health officers. Sanatoria 
and hospitals, dispensaries, district nursing, tuberculosis classes and other 



626 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

semipublic institutions should be increased in number and improved in 
quality. The medical profession, keeping pace with these changes, should 
be the chief means of conveying their benefits to the public. Universities 
and research institutions need to take up the study of hygiene in all its 
branches. Now that the diseases of childhood are receiving attention, the 
next step should be to study the diseases of middle life. These are diseases 
to a large extent of nutrition and circulation, and consequently these subjects 
should receive special attention. Intelligent action must rest on knowledge, 
and knowledge of preventing disease is as yet extremely imperfect. 

7. In industrial and commercial establishments employers may greatly aid 
the health movement, and in many cases make their philanthropy self-sup- 
porting by providing social secretaries, lunch and rest rooms, physiological 
(generally shorter) hours of work, provision for innocent amusements, seats 
for women, etc. 

Life insurance companies should properly and with much profit club 
together to instruct their risks in self-care, and secure general legislation 
and enforcements of legislation in behalf of public health. 

8. The present striking change in personal habits of living should be 
carried out to its logical conclusions, until the health ideals and the ideals 
of athletic training shall become universal. This change involves a quiet 
revolution in habits of living; a more intelligent utilization of one's en- 
vironment, especially in regard to the condition of the air in our houses; 
the character of the clothes we wear; of the site and architecture of the 
dwelling, with respect to sunlight, soil, ventilation and sanitation; the char- 
acter of food; its cooking; the use of alcohol, tobacco and drugs; and, last, 
but not least, sex hygiene in all its bearings. 

9. The fight against disease will aid in the fight against pauperism and 
crime. It is also true that any measures which tend to eliminate poverty, 
vice and crime will tend to improve sanitary conditions. 

10. Finally, eugenics, or hygiene for future generations, should be studied 
and gradually put in practice. This involves the prohibition of flagrant 
cases of marriage of the unfit, such as syphilitics, the insaue, feeble-minded, 
epileptics, paupers or criminals, etc. The example of Indiana 1 in this regard 
should be considered and followed by other States, as also in regard to the 
•unsexing of rapists, criminals, idiots and degenerates generally. A public 
opinion should be aroused which will not only encourage healthy and dis- 
countenance degenerate marriages, but will become so imbedded in the 
minds of the rising generation as unconsciously but powerfully to affect 
their marriage choices. 

1 Indiana has a law providing for the unsexing of certain classes of criminals. Over 800 have 
already been treated in this way. 



1910.1 HOUSE — No. 1750. 627 



Appendix D. 



MASSACHUSETTS FARM PRODUCE: ECONOMIES IN PRO- 
DUCING, HANDLING AND DISTRIBUTING. 



[Report prepared for the Massachusetts Commission on the Cost of Living, by Dr. Alexander 
E. Cance, Massachusetts Agricultural College. 1 ] 



In the ordinary course of trade, perishable produce transported by 
rail goes through the hands of at least three middlemen, all of whom 
have heavy risks to incur and a more or less valuable service to per- 
form under the present system. Even under the most careful manage- 
ment, deterioration and heavy losses must occur, at frequent intervals 
seasons of scarcity and glut will come, and ruinous competition from 
various sources must be met. For these reasons, the comparatively high 
charges of these men are partially justified. 

The first middleman is the commission man to whom the shipper 
makes his consignment. He meets the produce on arrival, usually hauls 
it to the street or his warehouse, or transfers the load to the jobber 
to whom he endeavors to dispose of most of his produce, and charges 
10 per cent, of the selling price for his service. What he cannot sell 
to the jobber, who takes the best of the produce, he tries to get rid 
of by way of hucksters and venders. Frequently, after the jobbers 
are stocked up early in the day, shrewd hucksters will make very low 
offers on the wilting, deteriorating produce, and along in the evening- 
may buy it at ridiculously low figures, since any price is better than 
no sale. This low-grade stuff is peddled out next day to the cheapest 
class of customers. 

The jobber is the second man in line; he buys from the commission 
man for regular customers outside the city, or for local retail produce 
dealers, butchers, marketmen and grocers. In general, he fills standing 
or special orders, and disposes of all his produce. He re-consigns 
produce ordered from outside, and delivers to his city customers. For 
his services in transferring the goods he receives ordinarily from 10 
to 15 per cent. It may be said that he buys the best of the produce, 

1 Parts of Dr. Cance's paper have been used in the body of the report, in the discussions to 
which they were pertinent. 



628 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

loads it up before daylight, and delivers it to the retailer before the 
latter opens his store in the morning. 

The final middlemen are the retailers, npon whom must fall the 
burden of distribution to private families in small lots, the loss by 
deterioration or surplus stock, the gauging of the daily fluctuating de- 
mand, and the many expenses incident to a sanitary store and a com- 
petent system of delivery. In addition to these expenses, the retailer 
is subject to the close competition of the huckster and the peddler, 
whose supplies cost less, usually, and whose expenses for store rents, 
etc., are practically nothing. 

Some investigations by the editor of the " Produce News," New 
York, in August, 1909, represent the commission men as receiving 
the same percentage for handling as in 1896, or even less. Straw- 
berries that passed from the commission merchants' hands at 3 to 7 
cents a box were being sold at 10 to 20 cents in grocery stores later 
in the day. Jersey cantaloupes by the crate of 45 were sold by re- 
ceiving commission men at an average price of $1 a crate. The grocer 
never retailed them for less than 5 cents each, and received 10 cents 
each for half of them. At 5 cents the profit was 125 per cent.; at 
10 cents it was 350 per cent. Potatoes ranged during the summer in 
New York from $1.50 to $2 per bag of 11 pecks on the receiving 
pier; almost never have they gone above $3. The grocer sold them 
very uniformly at 50 cents a peck, making his retail price $5.50 a 
bag, or from 85 to 270 per cent, above his buying price. A recent 
investigation has shown that western apples, which sell at wholesale 
to the retailers for $3 to $3.50 a box of about 100 apples, are selling 
for 10 cents or more apiece, or $1 to $1.20 a dozen. The difference 
between $3 and $10 is frequently the measure of the retailer's surplus 
per box. A hundred similar illustrations might be adduced, to prove 
that the retailer adds more to the price than any other distributor of 
an article. Retail prices on a great deal of produce in small lots 
do not vary much from year to year. Potatoes that the New York 
farmer is now selling at 15 to 25 cents a bushel are offered at " bar- 
gain " prices by New York City grocers, " 100 pounds for $1.25." The 
farmer sold them for 30 to 35 cents a hundred pounds; the consumer 
gets them at an advance of nearly 300 per cent, above the farmer's 
selling price. The price per peck is just about the same as a year 
ago, when the supply had to be augmented by importing some 3,000,000 
bushels of foreign potatoes. 

The retailer, in general, does not deny these enormous advances on 
the purchase price, but he justifies them on the ground of increased 
rents; sales of small quantities; wagon delivery of small packages; 
deteriorating stocks of produce, — rots, culls and unsalable stock, that 
mean almost total loss ; increased expense of maintaining a store up to the 
standard of increasing sanitary regulations; the growing fastidiousness 
of customers; and the sharpness of competition. The economist would 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 629 

add to this the wasteful system of many small retail stores, butcher 
shops and milk dealers, very few of whom do business on a scale large 
enough to assure a reasonable surplus, unless the percentage of profit 
is excessive; the wastefulness of reduplicating milk, vegetable and 
meat deliveries, due to overlapping routes; the lack of organization 
on the part of distributors; and the sometimes unreasonable demands 
of consumers as to the time and manner of delivery. 

Milk, for example, in most cities is distributed by an unnecessarily 
large number of independent dealers or producers, who frequently 
follow each other in a veritable procession along the residential 
streets, sometimes a dozen going over a route that might well be served 
by a single one of them. Substantially the same conditions obtain 
in the final distribution of other farm produce. 

Many of the elements contributing to increased prices cannot be 
changed without reducing the standard of living. Sanitation, pure 
food, select grades, special telephone and delivery service, high rents 
and other factors incident to better living must be paid for. Food 
costs more to produce, more to prepare for consumption and more 
to handle, as the standard of living for producer and consumer in- 
creases. There are some evident wastes, however, that can be elim- 
inated by system and organization. 

Auction Sales Rooms. — Selling fruit at auction in the final market 
is well known both in the United States and Europe. The Liverpool 
fruit auctions are noted. In the United States, in several of the 
largest cities, — New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Pittsburg, 
Cleveland, St. Louis and Chicago, — the railroads have devoted much 
space in their receiving warehouses to agents and growers and whole- 
sale dealers who wish to dispose of fruit by this method. The fruit 
is open to the inspection of all prospective buyers, put up for sale 
and knocked down to the highest bidder. Any one may bid who has 
the money to buy a box or a barrel of apples or a crate of oranges. 
Hucksters, grocers, push-cart men, shippers, large produce dealers or 
consumers come to bid and buy. The sales are cash, the fruit is taken 
by the buyer, and there are no commissions. This is a thoroughly 
up-to-date method of distributing fruit rapidly and effectively, espe- 
cially in the great cities. Not- only has it proved satisfactory to the 
shipper on the score of. immediate returns, but in every place where 
the plan has been put into operation the consumption of fruit has 
increased by leaps and bounds. Fruit is sold on its merits, and sold 
just as soon as it can be unloaded and put up for sale. It is easy to 
keep tab on the supply in the market, and the man who watches the 
auction rooms seldom need unload his produce on an overstocked mar- 
ket. Nor can the fruit vender and the huckster wait until a consign- 
ment has partly spoiled, in order that he may buy for almost nothing 
and sell the decayed fruit for anything he can get. At the New York 
auctions hundreds of small dealers and peddlers come with their wagons, 



630 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

buy the fruit fresh from the car, and take it away at once to the 
retailer or the consumer. 

The expenses of handling fresh fruit seem by this means reduced 
almost to a minimum. With a steady supply, there is no storage, no 
commission charge, no unnecessary handling, and no special favor ex- 
tended the large purchaser at the expense of the small dealer. Fruit 
exchanges have been quick to recognize the advantages of the method, 
and to place their own agents in the receiving rooms of the auction 
markets; that is to say, these shipping associations supply their own 
middleman, who disposes of his fruit by auction as soon as it arrives 
at the eastern market. 

There seems no good reason why other perishable produce should 
not be sold in the same way, with the same favorable results. Car- 
loads or small lots of fresh vegetables or berries, unloaded from the 
cars early in the morning, might be disposed of at once to the best 
bidder and started on the way to the consumer without delay. Wide- 
awake commission men are already predicting that this modern, effective 
method of handling produce must soon take the place of the old com- 
mission-jobber system. It is now being introduced in a few places 
with promising results. Such a method for the disposal of rail-shipped 
products would greatly encourage co-operative shipments and pro- 
ducers' sales agents. Moreover, it would eliminate the cheap huckster, 
who lies in wait for decayed produce, and delays buying until the 
produce of the commission man spoils on his hands. On the other 
hand, the commission man and the jobber cannot well buy cheap and 
hold back produce from the market in order to raise prices. 

The greatest saving will accrue to the shipper, who will get all that 
his shipment brings on the open market. But the consumer should 
reap no inconsiderable benefits, in better prices, fresher produce and 
a more uniform quality. All dealers have an equal opportunity, and 
apparently handling charges will be reduced to loading the produce 
from the platforms onto the wagons. 

Produce put up in this way and sold on its merits will induce a 
healthful rivalry among growers in the production of good vegetables 
and fruits, uniformly packed, in clean and attractive packages. Many 
of the growers' losses are due to poor grading and packing. Some 
growers realize this, but many persistently lay the blame of small re- 
turns on the commission man, whom they in consequence denounce 
bitterly. Some of the vituperation is well directed, but a fair share 
of the loss lies in the farmers' ignorance or carelessness. The auction 
room will accurately measure market values and indicate delinquencies. 

Organized Marketing. — The present demands of the market call for 
large quantities of produce, shipped regularly in marketable order. 
To measure accurately the capacity of the produce market, to keep well 
posted on the consumers' demands and to get the produce quickly and 
in good order upon a live market requires a degree of business ability 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 631 

and skill that the average farmer does not possess, or requires a closer 
attention than few farmers can well give. Careful students of the 
situation are coming to believe that marketing or preparing for market, 
which is really an advanced stage of production, can be handled profita- 
bly, in the large, only by experts in the employ of the farmers. This 
means organization, the union of growers, and the employment of 
managing experts to attend to the details of marketing, storage and 
the disposal of surplus. In other places this organization has meant 
agricultural encouragement, a larger supply of more desirable produce, 
better returns to the grower, and more uniform and satisfactory prices 
for the same quality of produce to the consumer; that is to say, the 
margin between the consumers' price and the producers' price is dimin- 
ished. The advantages of co-operative collection from farm to farm, 
of large community shipments and auction sales by shippers' agents 
have been mentioned. 

The Farmers' Market. — In practically all cities and towns over 
15,000 and under 200,000 in population, a large part of the demand 
for fruits, vegetables, milk and poultry is supplied by farmer huck- 
sters; in some cities provision is made for a farmers' market, usually 
in some wide street or open area, where, under the open sky, the 
farmer may back up his market wagon early in the morning and wait 
for customers — hucksters, retail grocers, consumers or produce dealers 
— to take it off his hands. The best produce usually goes first; that 
which remains until after midday, exposed to the sun, wind and rain, 
is not very attractive, and goes begging at any price. Inquiry among 
many of the truckers who dispose of their vegetables in Providence 
discloses the fact that few of them are making more than a meager 
livelihood. There are good reasons for this; one is the lack of a cov- 
ered, protected market, where produce can be displayed to good ad- 
vantage and kept in fair condition for a few hours. 

The well-built, commodious markets that are common enough in 
parts of Pennsylvania and southward fill a real place in the economic 
distribution of produce, and bring together more closely than in almost 
any other way the grower and the consumer. There is a place for 
the commission man, the wholesale produce merchant and the jobber; 
but there is also a place for the farmer and trucker who is situated 
so that he can rent a stall in a market and under careful sanitary 
and other regulations dispose of his produce to the general public. 
There are very many housewives who are willing and able to carry 
their own market baskets, and select at some convenient market their 
own fruit and vegetables. In one city in Pennsylvania of over 45,000 
inhabitants there are three or four of these farmers' markets open on 
certain days in the week. Here there are no wholesale produce dealers 
and very few commission men, but few cities enjoy a better selection 
of farm produce at more reasonable prices than this one. The grower 
is his own middleman, and retail prices are exceptionally low. 



632 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Wherever good f aimers' markets have been established, some retailers 
of produce, hucksters and produce jobbing houses have been eliminated 
or found unnecessary. On the other hand, a great body of consumers 
have been benefited. 

The terminal facilities for reception, handling, cold storage and the 
provision for local trucking trade are problems for the municipalities 
to meet and solve. It is almost certain that railroad corporations will 
do anything within reason; but the cities can well afford to make 
provision for storage warehouses for produce by rail, and for de- 
sirable farmers' markets. Once provided, the rentals should be fully 
sufficient to meet expenses of maintenance, depreciation, interest, care, 
policing and contingent charges. Aside from the saving to the con- 
sumer, sanitary regulations would be much more easily enforced than 
under the present out-door, under-the-weather method of disposal of 
produce. 

It is a lamentable fact, but one that must be noticed, that many cities 
not only do not encourage, but actually discourage, the retail sale of 
produce by growers. No sheds are built for the accommodation of 
buyers or for the protection of horses. The city charges rent for the 
space occupied by the unprotected animals, and frequently fines all 
market-wagon horses found elsewhere. No adequate booths or stalls 
are erected to shelter buyers, and no attempt is made to encourage 
a first-class trade. The wagon market might be greatly stimulated 
and easy distribution secured if boards of trade would give this matter 
some long-sighted consideration. The city has more interest in cheap 
produce than the country. 

Summary. — There is little hope that the prices of farm produce 
will be lowered in any material degree. Farmers are making no un- 
reasonable profits at present prices; a few years ago most of them 
were producing at a loss. The price of Massachusetts produce is regu- 
lated to a great degree by the supply raised in other parts of the 
United States, much of it under more favorable circumstances of 
climate, soil, land or labor, and shipped hundreds or even thousands 
of miles to the Massachusetts markets. The staple, storable crops and 
products will probably continue to be produced outside of the State; 
but there is hope that Massachusetts may be able to supply her own 
people with most of their milk, vegetables, fruit, fish and poultry 
products. At present she is not doing this. 

Possible economies lie in cheapening the cost of production, by spread 
of a knowledge of better methods; by co-operative endeavor in local 
specialization of products; by better facilities for obtaining capital; 
and by the co-operative employment of labor and expensive but labor- 
saving equipment. 

Lessened cost of distribution may be brought about by increased 
means for getting the producer and consumer together : — 






1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 633 

(a) Direct shipments in large lots through shipping associations and 
in small lots by trolley freight service, reasonable express charges 
and a parcels post would greatly encourage production and give the 
grower better returns at present prices. 

(b) Cities and railroads should co-operate with the rural producer 
to the extent of encouraging the growing and sale of local products, 
by giving ample and adequate terminals for the reception, handling, 
protection and storage of produce brought in by rail or hauled in large 
quantities. The farmers' market under municipal supervision should 
be encouraged by boards of trade in third and fourth class cities, as 
one of the best methods of encouraging home production and providing 
for the direct exchange of perishables from grower to householder. 

(c) Auction sales rooms in the larger cities, for the disposal of fruit 
and perishable produce directly from the shippers' car to the retailer 
or the consumer, work in economically and very effectively with the 
co-operative shipping associations and the consigners of large volumes 
of produce. Not only have these fruit auctions eliminated wastes, but 
they have greatly increased the demand for fruit. In smaller cities 
an organization of the local growers who distribute from house to 
house, co-operative milk-distributing depots, and, if possible, the cen- 
tralization of the distribution of perishable produce, will economize 
the delivery of milk and other products to families, and help to keep 
down excessive costs in getting produce in small quantities to the 
consumer. 

(d) Finally, and perhaps very effectively, communities that raise 
marketable quantities of any produce can bring about great savings 
by the co-operative collection of produce, eggs, milk, poultry and 
vegetables for shipment; by the construction of community storage 
houses for holding such perishables as cabbage, potatoes, fruit and 
other products, and forwarding them regularly in moderate quantities 
to the market; and by building canning and other factories for the 
disposal of seconds and surplus stocks of produce. More than all, 
the farmers will benefit by business organizations to study markets 
and market demands, to provide for putting steadily on the market 
standard, inspected, guaranteed products, uniform in appearance and 
quality, in neat, attractive packages of convenient, uniform size. 

Massachusetts agriculture needs business organization. It needs also 
the support and encouragement of the cities that it feeds, of the rail- 
roads that carry its products to market and of the Legislature of this 
Commonwealth. Let the cities give as much attention to the encour- 
agement of local production, the provision for terminal facilities and 
satisfactory markets to insure easy and efficient distribution as they 
do to industrial enterprises, and a great stimulus will be given agri- 
culture. Boards of trade need committees on agriculture, and city 
improvement associations need to investigate farmers' markets. In 



634 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

every way closer relations between city and country will be beneficial, 
for the interest of the consumer and the producer, in the long run, 
are one. 

The present chaotic condition of the produce market, with its un- 
reasonable daily price fluctuations and ruinous wastes from overstock- 
ing, would be amended by the formation of middlemen's exchanges to 
supply information with regard to daily receipts in the whole market, 
and to order consignments of produce according to the demand. 

Organization of the distributors on both sides will put the produce 
trade on a sound, orderly basis, and diminish the price margin between 
grower and consumer. 



1910.1 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



635 



Appendix E. 



ANALYSIS OF CURRENT EXPLANATIONS OF HIGH PRICES. 



The causes of the recent advance of prices have been discussed by 
economists and expert observers in various articles in the magazines 
and reviews of the last six months. The contributions to this dis- 
cussion are marked by a wide variety of opinion. There is, however, 
a striking consensus of opinion regarding one cause of the upward price 
movement, namely, the increased production of gold. The following 
table presents an analysis of the causes assigned for the increase of 
prices by the writers of thirty articles that have appeared in print 
since January 1, 1910 : — - 



Causes. 



Principal 
Cause. 


Contributory 
Cause. 


17 


4 


4 


8 


2 


3 


2 


1 


2 


10 


1 


7 


1 


3 


1 


4 


- 


6 


- 


5 


- 


3 


- 


3 


- 


2 



1. Increase of gold supply, 

2. Exhaustion of natural resources, 

3. Risin : standard of living, 

4. Withdrawal of population from agriculture, and growth of 

cities. 

5. Trusts and combinations 

6. Tariff 

7. Labor unions 

8. Growth of population, and unscientific methods of farming, 

9. Extravagance in expenditure, 

10. Waste and fraud in distribution, . . . 

11. Uneconomical marketing and hpusekeeping, 

12. Speculation, 

13. Immigration, 



The figure given in the first column of the table, under the head 
" Principal Cause," indicates the number of writers who assign the 
chief importance to the factor in question; that given in the second 
column, " Contributory Cause," shows the number who regard the in- 
fluence of the cause enumerated as secondary. It appears that 17 



636 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

out of the 30 writers attribute the advance of prices mainly to the 
increase of the gold supply; 4 others regard this cause as of secondary 
importance. Exhaustion of natural resources, resulting in diminished 
returns from agriculture, increased expenses of production and pres- 
sure of population on the land, is given the first place by 4 writers; 
8 others ascribe secondary importance to this factor. A rising standard 
of living is believed to be the primary cause of higher prices by 2 
of the contributors to the recent discussion; 3 others assign some 
weight to this influence. Withdrawal of population from agriculture, 
and growth of the cities, which are both consequences of the con- 
centration of population, are regarded as the main factor by only 2 
writers, and as a secondary cause by 1. The growth of population in 
general, combined with unscientific methods of agriculture, resulting 
in disproportion between the population and the food supply, is selected 
as the first cause by 1 observer; this cause is given secondary im- 
portance by 4 others. Two writers place the responsibility chiefly 
upon trusts and combinations, and 10 others assign more or less im- 
portance to this cause. The tariff is assigned as the primary cause 
by only 1 writer, but is held to be a contributory influence by 7 others. 
Similarly, the influence of labor unions is declared to be the chief 
cause by 1 person, and is mentioned also by 3 others. The foregoing 
are the only influences that are regarded as chief factors in the ad- 
vance of prices; the others are regarded by all the writers as of 
secondary importance, in varying degrees. 

The manner in which the chief causes are assumed to operate in 
bringing about an advance of prices is set forth in the following ex- 
tracts from the papers summarized in the preceding table : — 

1. Increase of Gold Supply. 
Thus all the current particular explanations are insufficient. To say that 
the present high prices are due to trusts will not explain the similar rise of 
prices in cases where there are no trusts in those particular commodities in 
this country, or no trusts at all in other countries where the rise of prices 
is also well marked. To say that high prices are due to the tariff does not 
explain the similar rise of prices in England, where there is no protective 
tariff. To say that high prices are due to labor unions or to the associated 
action of labor does not explain the rise of prices in the Orient, where there 
are no labor unions. To say that rising prices are due to the growth of 
population does not explain the falling prices of a decade ago, when popula- 
tion increased at virtually the same rate. During the free silver agitation 
the favorite argument of men like Mr. David A. Wells was that falling prices 
were due to the progress of invention. Yet the progress of invention has con- 
tinued unabated during the past twelve years, and yet prices have risen in- 
stead of falling. It is obvious, then, that apart from the minor oscillations 
in any one commodity a general change in the level of prices can be explained 
only by a cause which attaches equally to all prices. Now, price in general 
is value expressed in terms of money; hence a general change in the price 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 637 

level means a change in the value of money. But the value of money, like 
the value of everything else, depends on the relation of the supply of money 
to the demand for money. From the point of view of supply the answer is 
easy. The standard of the civilized world is now, and has been for some 
time, gold. . . . Gold, in other words, is being turned out in such enormous 
quantities that it is falling in value. But a fall in the value of gold, other 
things being equal, is tantamount to a rise in general prices. (Prof. E. R. A. 
Seligman, Columbia University, in " Journal of Commerce and Commercial 
Bulletin," January 3, 1910.) 

2. Exhaustion of Natural Resources. 
We have begun to feel this land-crowding effect. Agriculture on the 
average has begun to grow more intensive. If inventions and discoveries of 
the future are to annul or reverse this effect, they must be of a different kind 
from those that have given us our seeders, reapers, threshers, etc. We shall 
need thereafter, not something that will enable a man to till more acres, but 
something that will enable him to get greater and greater returns from a 
single acre. We have reached the beginning of the period of increasing 
intensiveness of agriculture, and by one of the cardinal laws of economics 
that process means a diminution of the per capita returns. Labor creates 
and gets less and less, all other things remaining the same, when it tills 
each acre more and more laboriously. (Prof. John Bates Clark, Columbia 
University, in the " Independent," March 10, 1910.) 

3. Rising Standard of Living. 
Ordinary explanations, such as the tariff, the trusts, the unions, etc., fall 
short of satisfying the observer who takes a broad view of the situation. 
These agencies may in a measure contribute, but the controlling cause lies 
deeper; it is, in fact, within ourselves. Food, shelter, clothing, education and 
society are five necessities of civilized existence. Are we now content with 
the same quality and quantity of any one of these requirements that satis- 
fied us in previous times? . . . The spread of popular education has brought 
about a decided and general advance in the standard of living, affecting 
every class of society. ... In all the five principal items of the working- 
man's cost of living, his demands and the demands upon him have largely 
increased. In the middle classes the general increase in desires as to food, 
homes, clothing, education and society has been even more marked, while 
among the wealthy there has been a significant growth in the indulgence of 
extravagant tastes in every direction; the result is a demand, hitherto 
unequaled, for all classes of luxuries. This leads up to the heart of the 
situation. Prices are established by the relation of the supply to the 
demand; production in this country, while steadily increasing, has not kept 
pace with the vastly enlarged demand brought on by the rapid growth of 
the desires of all our people. To this cause in largest measure may be 
traced the conspicuous rise in the cost of living. Of course tariffs have 
their influence in artificially accentuating the short supply of certain com- 
modities in various localities; trusts and labor combinations are also factors; 
but these are small items compared to the great underlying cause, namely, 
the change within ourselves, — our greater needs, our broader desires for the 
necessities, the comforts and the luxuries of life. When the supply of com- 



638 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

modities is increased so as to keep pace with our demands, or when our 
demands are restricted to present production, the prices of items making 
up our cost of living will be reduced. (Marcus M. Marks, President National 
Association of Clothiers, New York, in the "Delineator," April, 1910.) 

4. Withdrawal of Population from Agriculture, and Growth 

of Cities. 
There are many reasons to account for the increased cost of living. The 
number of persons growing wool and cotton and leather, and those devoting 
themselves to the growth of wheat and meat and vegetables, while increasing 
in actual numbers, is decreasing in proportional numbers. Thus the consumer 
is rapidly gaining in numbers on the producer. This, it may be said, is 
compensated for by the increased efficiency of the producer. It requires 
less labor, for instance, at the present time to produce a given unit of raw 
materials than in former years. It is true that labor-saving machinery has 
done much, but the fertility of the soil has diminished because of a lack 
of sufficient knowledge of the proper methods of its conservation. The 
labor, likewise, is greatly increased in price; so I take it that the initial 
cost of production is greater now than in former years. This, together 
with the increased demand, has produced a natural increase in prices which 
cannot be corrected unless the relations existing between producer and con- 
sumer are changed. It is not likely that this will take place; on the 
contrary, owing to the difference in methods of living and the attractions 
which gregarious life has for the human race, there will be, in my opinion, 
even a greater disproportion existing between consumer and producer. This 
is offset to a certain extent by the fact that consumers, especially those who 
reach a competence, are almost universally in their older days possessed with 
a desire to return to the soil and indulge in the production of the necessaries 
of life. This return to the soil, though, does not by any means compensate 
for the exodus from the soil to the city. (Dr. Harvey W. Wiley, Bureau 
of Chemistry, Department of Agriculture, symposium in the " Delineator," 
April, 1910.) 

5. Trusts and Combinations. 
As a general proposition, it is true that no general economic condition 
is due to any one cause. The industrial trust has, however, had a very 
important influence in bringing about the increase in the cost of the neces- 
sities of life; for these combinations have in effect repealed the law of 
supply and demand and done away with the old theory that " competition 
is the life of trade." A concrete example will serve as an illustration. In 
1896 oil was selling in St. Louis, Mo., for 6% cents a gallon. Ten years 
later, at the time I instituted suit in the name of the State of Missouri 
against the Standard Oil Trust, it was selling for 9^ cents a gallon. 
During this period the production of crude petroleum throughout the country 
had almost doubled, with a consequent decrease in price, while the produc- 
tion in the Kansas and Oklahoma oil fields had increased from 81,000 barrels 
in 1901 to 12,000,000 barrels in 1906, and its price had declined from $1.20 
a barrel in 1901 to 40 cents a barrel in 1906. The competition made pos- 
sible as a result of this litigation brought about a reduction in the price 
of oil in the State of Missouri from 9y 2 cents in 1906 to 6^ cents in 1908. 
(Herbert S. Hadley, Governor of Missouri, in the "Delineator," April, 1910.) 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 639 



6. Taeiff. 
In my judgment, the causes are to be found, not in cheapened gold, but 
in the forces increasing the expenses of production of goods. The first of 
these is the high rate of taxation imposed by the Dingley tariff act of 1897 
and continued by the last tariff act of 1909. The price of goods affected 
shows marked decline after the panic of 1893 and the passage of the 
Wilson act; then, after the passage of the Dingley act there followed a 
portentous rise of prices, e.g., blankets, hosiery, shirtings, woolen suitings, 
overcoatings, sheetings, worsted yarns, women's dress goods, lumber, zinc, 
axes, files, door knobs, etc. The most serious effect of the tariff was the 
increased cost of wool and of the various materials of manufacture, whereby 
the prices of the goods using these materials were raised far higher than 
the mere rise in the cost of materials, since finished goods received com- 
pensating duties for the raw materials and abundant protective duties 
besides. The National Association of American Manufacturers is to-day 
agitating for a lower tariff, especially on materials, because our manu- 
facturing costs make it impossible to compete with other countries in foreign 
markets. (Prof. J. Laurence Laughlin, University of Chicago, in the 
"Delineator," April, 1910.) 

7. Labor Unions. 
There is general complaint about high prices of the necessities of life, 
various reasons being assigned for the same, chief among which are the 
tariff and the capitalistic trusts; while as a matter of fact the primary 
cause of the constantly advancing prices of commodities of all kinds lies 
at the door of the labor trust, a cardinal principle of which is to raise 
wages and restrict production, neither of which can fail to diminish the 
purchasing power of the dollar, and when working together they doubly 
depreciate its value. Therefore, just so long as the labor trust is permitted 
to interfere with the law of supply and demand by restricting production 
and artificially advancing costs of commodities by abnormally high wages, 
just so long will our industrial affairs remain in a state of chaos and 
unrest, and just so long will that great portion of the public who cannot 
unionize be compelled to suffer the consequences. Why not strike at the 
root of the evil, and put the labor trust out of business first, instead of 
helping it on toward its " goal," as some well-intentioned men are blindly 
doing? (John Kirby, Jr., President National Association of Manufacturers, 
New York, in the " Delineator," April, 1910.) 

8. Growth of Population, and Unscientific Methods of 

Farming. 

The growth of population, which is simply another name for increased 
consumption, has overtaken production of food-supplying cereals and meats; 
and as the converging lines of production and consumption approach each 
other, prices must advance. ... I doubt if any country in the world excels 
the United States in natural fertility of soil, or has a more favorable general 
climate; but with our careless, uninformed methods of seed selection, 
fertilization and cultivation, our farms produce an annual yield of less than 



640 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

14 bushels of wheat per acre, as compared with 32 in England, 28 in 
Germany, 34 in the Netherlands and 20 in France. The United States 
produces something less than 23 bushels of oats per acre, while England 
produces 42, Germany 46 and the Netherlands 53. Potatoes, with wheat 
and corn, are a food staple of the poor man. Germany, with an arable 
area of less than some of our largest States, produces more than seven times 
the number of bushels of potatoes that are produced in all the States. The 
increased value of corn, wheat, oats and barley in the United States, pro- 
vided the average yield per acre of the same crops in Germany had been 
raised, and assuming a production of 50 bushels of corn to the acre, would 
have amounted to three and one-quarter billion dollars for the crop of 1909; 
and undoubtedly this increased production of grain would have enabled 
this country to have held the first place as a meat-exporting nation, which 
we have been compelled to surrender to Argentina. If population and con- 
sumption increase in the future as rapidly as they have during the last ten 
years, and production per acre of our farms is not greatly increased, within 
five years from the present, or before 1915, this country will have ceased 
to be a food-product-exporting nation; and within ten years we shall be 
importing more grain and meat per annum than we have ever exported in 
any one year for an average of five years, in our history. What will be 
the cost of living, under these circumstances? (W. C. Brown, President 
Xew York Central Lines, in the "Delineator," April, 1910.) 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 641 



Appendix F. 



FOOD PRICES IN CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES. 



At the request of the commission for the aid of experts, Arthur T. 
Cumings, president of the Boston Fruit and Produce Exchange, and 
Robert S. Wason, named by officers of the Executive Association of 
Wholesale Grocers of New England, the Boston Wholesale Grocers 
Association and the Boston Retail Grocers Association, visited Windsor, 
Ont., to make comparisons of retail food prices with those of Detroit, 
Mich.; Montreal, Que., for comparisons with Boston, Mass.; and St. 
John, N. B., for comparisons with Bangor, Me. Their reports 
follow : — 

Meat and Produce. 

To the Massachusetts Commission on the Cost of Living. 

The comparison of prices which I submit to you is taken with absolute 
impartiality. It would be possible to find in every city a range of prices 
and quality by which unfair comparison might be made. Also, the various 
ways of cutting up a carcass of beef would confuse one not familiar with 
the different cuts; e.g., in Montreal and St. John sirloins and rounds include 
the rump, and are cut in slices which contain a proportion of the tougher 
and less desirable cuts, also bone, which enables the retailer to net a better 
profit on the whole steer than is possible in Boston or Bangor, where con- 
sumers are educated to require special cuts of tender quality. 

In no city have I found used a quality of beef to compare with that in 
Boston. 

I find that the percentage of profit made by the jobber and retailer is 
far larger in Canadian cities than in Boston. I had one steer in Montreal 
figured up which netted a profit to the wholesaler of $15.75, where in 
Boston $5 is a large profit, and in most cases it falls below $2. This is 
in a measure accounted for by the fact that the large packers utilize the 
by-products to such advantage that their profit is made satisfactory. 

In the matter of poultry, Canada is not able to supply a proper quality 
at this season of the year, owing to the lack of cold-storage facilities, and, 
with the exception of Montreal, there is practically no supply at all. There 
are no young chickens, and any variation in price is the result of differences 
in the kind and quality of the last year's fowl. In St. John I found only 
one pair of fowl in the markets. If a customer wants any, the dealer 
orders a farmer to kill a chicken and bring it in on the following day. 

Eggs are plentiful just now, but at certain times of the year they are 
difficult to obtain. This condition is what has caused the Canadian govern- 



642 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



ment to offer a subsidy of 30 per cent, for the erection of cold-storage 
warehouses. 

Pork conditions are similar in both countries. The low prices of two or 
three years ago and the high price of corn caused the farmer to raise fewer 
hogs and cattle and to sell his corn. I heard one remark frequently that 
the boys of this generation flock to the cities, securing employment on 
electric cars, in factories and stores, thus leaving the farmer alone to hire 
high-priced help of an undesirable character, or else to raise just enough 
for home use, thereby allowing 90 per cent, of producing capability to lie 
idle. 

Lamb and mutton are of better quality and in larger quantity, compared 
to the demand, than in the United States, which also accounts in a measure 
for the cheaper price of woolen manufactured goods, but the cost of labor 
and longer hours also are significant factors. 

Potatoes and soup vegetables must be had by all consumers at any 
price. As a rule, some particular vegetable is scarce in the spring before 
the new crop comes in, and as vegetables are mostly grown locally, prices 
vary accordingly. There was a large crop of potatoes in both the United 
States and Canada this year, and many carloads will go to waste and be 
fed to stock this spring. 

Onions are very scarce in Canada, selling at high prices, while cabbage 
can be bought in Montreal for 50 cents a barrel. 

Parsnips are very scarce in Bangor, while in Montreal any offer for a 
quantity would be accepted. 

All the early green vegetables have to be brought to Canada from the 
United States at this season of the year, Montreal importing more than any 
other city. As they are luxuries, it was not considered wise to compare 
their prices. Arthur T. Cumings. 



Akticle. 


Detroit. 


Windsor. 


Boston. 


Montreal. 


Bangor. 


St. John. 


Beef. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Whole cattle: i — 














Price per pound, 


8-11 


9 


9-12 


9-9^ 


m-ny 2 


10-10^ 


Cows, 


6-8 


7-8 


- 


- 


- 


7-8 


Retail: — 














Porterhouse steak, . 


15-20 


17-20 


28-30 


18-20 


25 


22 


Sirloin, 


20 


18 


28 


20 


25 


20 


Round, 


12K-16 


14-15 | 


Top, 25 

Bottom, 17 


15-18 | 


Top 25 
Bottom, 17 


| 16-20 


Corned beef, 


10-14 


10-WA 


10-16 


11-14 


8-15 


10-12 


Bologna, . 


12^-18 


10-16 


15 


9-12^ 


12 


12 


Head cheese, 


i2y 2 


10 


10-12 


12 


12 


10 


Liver, 


8 


5 


10-12 


5-6 


10 


5 


Shin, 


4 


3 


6-7 


6 


6 


6 


3-rib roast, 


15-20 


14-15 


20 


15-8 


15 


18-20 



1 Dressed weight (pounds): Detroit, 450-600; Windsor, 500-600; Boston, 750-1,000; Montreal, 
650-700; Bangor, 600-900; St. John, 550-700. 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



643 



Article. 


Detroit. 


Windsor. 


Boston. 


Montreal. 


Bangor. 


St. John. 


Poultry. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Chicken 


17-18 


17-18 


23 


18-22 


30 


None 


Fowl, .... 


17-18 


15-18 


22 


15-17 


25 


30 


Duck 


19-20 


None 


25 


22-24 


None 


None 


Geese, .... 


15 


None 


25 


15-16 


None 


None 


Turkey, .... 


20-24 


None 


33 


20-22 


35 


None 


Pork. 
Whole 


WA-U 


12-WA 


14 


14M 


13H 


12 


Fresh ribs, 


14-16 


14-18 


17 


18-20 


20 


18 


Neck bones, . 


6 


- 


- 


5-7 


- 


- 


Sausage meat, 


14 


11 


12 


13 


- 


- 


Head 


10 


8 


10 


6-8 


5 


6 


Leaf, .... 


14-16 


15 


17 


17-18 


13 


14 


Smoked shoulder, . 


15 


17 


14 


17 


15 


15 


Whole ham, 


18-20 


20 


19 


20 


20 


20 


Sliced ham, 


22 


24 


22 


24 


25 


22 


Whole bacon, . 


21 


23 


22 


23 


20 


20 


Sliced bacon, . 


22 


25 


24 


24 


25 


22 


Sausage, .... 


w& 


12H 


14 


20 


12 


15 


Salt pork, 


18 


15 


15 


19 


16 


16 


Lard, .... 


18 


20 


18 


20 


18 


20 


Compound, 


16 


- 


- 


- 


16 


- 


Lamb. 
Whole 


12H-16 


13-15 


14-15 


11H-12 


15 


10 


Legs, .... 


20 


17-20 


22 


18 


25 


14 


Fores, .... 


16 


14-15 


15 


11 


12 


8 


Loins, .... 


20 


18-20 


22 


18 


25 


16 


Veal. 
Whole 


10-13 


9-9M 


14 


12H 


13-14 


10 


Lega 


15 


14 


25 


18 


20 


12 


Fores 


12H 


12H 


13 


10 


10 


6 


Loins 


15 


15 


16% 


18 


20 


15 


Butter. 














Northern storage, . 


32 " 


- 


33 


32 


- 


- 


Creamery, 


31 


30 


32 


30 


- 


- 


Dairy 


- 


- 


- 


- 


28 


27 


Print 


35 


35 


38 


35 


33 


30 


Egg 8. 














Fresh hennery, 


28 


21 


30 


30 


22 


23 


Western 


25 


18 


25 


25 


- 


18i 


Cheese 


18 


18 


20 


18 


18-20 


15 



1 Prince Edward Island. 



644 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Article. 


Detroit. 


Windsor. 


Boston. 


Montreal. 


Bangor. 


St. John. 


Vegetables. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Cents. 


Potatoes, .... 


40-50 


60 


60 


50 


50 


40 


Yellow turnips, 






60 


50 


65 


50 


50 


35 


White turnips, 






50 


- 


75 


- 


- 


- 


Onions, . 






85 


$1.35 


$1.00 


$1.35 


$1.25 


5i 


Beets, 






50 


75 


75 


50 


65 


50 


Carrots, . 






60 


- 


75 


60 


50 


60 


Parsnips, 






75 


65 


75 


50 


$1.25 


60 


Cabbage (each), 






10 


10 


10 


• 5 


10 


10 



Spanish. 



Staple Groceries. 
To the Massachusetts Commission on the Cost of Living. 

It is almost impossible to make up a schedule or chart covering prices 
for accurate comparison, owing to the fact that some cities use different 
qualities and different kinds of goods. The following schedule presents a 
few staple articles that can be compared fairly accurately, having in mind 
that the prices represent the minimum and maximum cost to the mass of 
consumers, and pertain to goods of approximately like intrinsic value. 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



645 



JOO*«1' •?«? CN^^S 222 £ O 

■■h^I.^LnHvLvL-'O.IOI I IO 7 'f 

^SKSSR*' g i 

kOCO 00 oooo o CO 






X 









00 00 00 



a-Jg^rM 



NJ» ooo 



SO rtNto T -^(M ^-*S I T -N^N 

' 00 00 w ww oJ,<*® 



o o 

ON 



\*0 «"° 

^Wwowo?!!)^^ < 

2*N ^<co ci-<N\ "* ^oooooo on 



I 00 00<N 



n* «»r?^ 222 & « 



'78 s tS 



\« ^ eo 

S>W *H up 



^N^*;r 



O o 



oooooo o 



T3-OT3 2-T3 rj'O O T3 -O T> T3 T) Tj'O'd A T> 

flflflfHflofl— flflflflfl .flflflo -3 

333* 33 3«33333fl33 3=2 fl d 3 3 "2 3 

ooo*osomooooo5ooo135ijS S o 
& a a co a a a a, a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 

33 3^ d 3 0^ 33 3 fl 3 dfl fl flflfl fl 3 fl 3 3 

uooQuooQoooooooouoooou o o 



a 



a 2 -2 
_ s 8 >- & 



3 « O^: 







I- 



S3 

a* • 

s a 2 g g 8 j> p SU a-s ^ g S 
S§3 8 3j2laJ'S 1 2'J-Jaj3ca.afl8o8cjo8 c o 



3.3 



S a a 
ba8l a 

2 S? d a a 3 
aS a a 3 s 



646 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Canada produces and manufactures, or imports from countries other than 
the United States, all the above listed products except prunes, raisins and 
some rice, which are bought from the United States, all three paying a duty. 
A careful examination of Canada's customs duty might show a very decided 
approach to parity in the cost, outside of duties, to the consumers in Canada 
as compared with the United States. 

The wholesale grocers of Canada apparently sell on a close margin, and 
the retailers obtain only a reasonable profit. Labor is apparently $1 to $2 
a week cheaper in Canada than in the United States. Eaw materials in 
foods are in some cases cheaper in Canada than in the United States, while 
in some foods manufactured in Canada there is not quite the care and selec- 
tion that is apparent in the United States product selling at approximately 
the same figure. 

Following is submitted a list of foods which, owing to difference in 
kind and grade, could not be specifically compared by selling prices, but 
which I shall generalize as higher or lower in one country or the other, 
according to what in my judgment the customers get for their money: — 



Chocolate (cooking), 
Cereal foods (packages), 
Citron, 

Cream of tartar, 

Peaches (canned), . 

Milk (condensed), . 

Molasses, . 

Olives (in bottles), . 

Soap, 

Soda, . 

Teas, . 



Baker's higher in Canada; other grades about 
equal. 

Cost retailer and consumer approximately the 
same in both countries. 

Imported goods sell in Canada for about what 
our domestic crystalized goods sell for in the 
United States. 

Sell at about the same price in both countries, 
except where goods are used of less per cent, 
purity. 

Canada packs in Ontario a peach entirely dif- 
ferent from our California product; prices 
are higher in Canada. 

Prices rule about the same to the consumer in 
both countries; sold a little cheaper to whole- 
saler in Canada in some cases. 

Canada uses different variety from the United 
States, with prices to the consumer about the 
same per gallon. 

Olives in bottles are much higher in Canada; 
a 10-ounee bottle of 90/110 Queen sells for 
25 cents in Canada, while a 14-ounce bottle of 
90/110 Queen sells for 25 cents in the United 
States. 

Soap retails at about the same prices in both 
countries, except where American products 
are imported, in which case they are higher. 

Canada uses different weight packages from the 
United States; consumer pays generally more 
in Canada than in the United States. 

Canada uses mostly blended teas in foil pack- 
ages, while Detroit uses Japans, Bangor and 
Boston mostly Oolongs; consumers' prices 
average lower in Canada. 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



647 



Salmon (canned), 



Nuts, 



Canned goods, 



Canada uses principally a sockeye salmon, at 
18 cents at retail; the United States uses 
principally a Eed Alaska salmon, at 15 
cents at retail; the customer gets equal 
relative value in both cases. 

Canada uses French walnuts, at about 15 cents 
a pound at retail; the United States uses 
California and Naples walnuts, at about 17 
to 18 cents a pound, at retail. 

The Canadian prices on the largest selling varie- 
ties of canned goods are nearly the same, as 
far as the consumer is concerned. There 
apparently is not quite the variety and care- 
ful grading in Canada that is shown in the 
United States product, which must show a 
slightly higher commercial value cost in 
Canada over that of a similar product in 
the United States. 



Taking into consideration all the foregoing data, it is the opinion of 
the writer, based on his observations and comparisons as far as he has gone 
in the research, that the consumer gets, on an average, fully as much value, 
more variety and in some cases a better article for his money in the United 
States than in Canada. 

A good many American manufacturers have factories in Canada, in order 
to avoid tariff duties imposed by Canada. But the combined tariff of both 
countries seems, with few exceptions, to be an impenetrable wall between 
them so far as trade in staple groceries is concerned, although there are 
American goods that retail in Canada at a higher price than in the United 
States, owing to the Canadian tariff. 

KOBERT S. WASON. 



648 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Appendix G, 



WHOLESALE PRICES OF TRUST-CONTROLLED COMMODITIES. 



Comparative Quotation of Raw and Refined Sugars, New York, 1885-1909. 
{Cents per Pound. After 1894, Net for Cash.) 

[From Willet & Gray's "Weekly Statistical Sugar Trade Journal," February 8, 1894, January 4, 
1900, and January 6, 1910.] 







1885. 


1886. 


1887. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 

Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 

Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 
February 
March, 
April, . 
May, . 
June, . 
July, . 
August, 
September, 
October, 
November, 
December, 




6.162 
6.156 
6.000 
6.062 
6.687 
6.737 
6.453 
6.750 
6.906 
6.546 
6.593 
6.625 


5.487 
5.546 
5.362 
5.375 
5.890 
6.162 
5.968 
6.062 
6.187 
6.093 
6.000 
6.250 




675 
610 
638 
687 
797 
575 
485 
688 
719 
453 
593 
375 


6.625 
6.140 
6.225 
6.810 
6.343 
6.185 
6.195 
6.065 
5.955 
5.825 
5.690 
5.725 


6.125 
5.703 
5.562 
5.796 
5.484 
5.437 
5.390 
5.237 
5.296 
5.187 
5.166 
5.175 


.500 
.437 
.663 
.014 
.859 
.748 
.795 
.828 
.650 
.638 
.524 
.550 


5.825 
5.687 
5.725 
5.689 
5.734 
5.850 
5.935 
6.037 
6.078 
6.406 
6.630 
6.875 


5.200 
5.125 
5.150 
5.171 
5.125 
5.187 
5.265 
5.312 
5.390 
5.640 
5.937 
5.940 


.625 
.562 
.575 
.518 
.609 
.663 
.670 
.775 
.688 
.766 
.693 
.935 


Yearly avera 
Net cash, 


■ges, . 


6.473 
6.441 


5.865 
5.729 




608 
712 


6.147 
6.117 


5.463 
5.336 


.684 
.781 


6.043 
6.013 


5.370 
5.245 


.673 
.768 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



649 



Comparative Quotation of Raw and Refined Sugars, etc. 


— Cor 


i. 




1888. 


1889. 


1890. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


1 

7.125 


5.950 


1.175 


7.050 


5.650 


1.400 


6.475 


5.688 


.787 


February, 




6.800 


5.513 


1.287 


7.000 


5.563 


1.437 


6.312 


5.625 


.687 


March, 




6.750 


5.435 


1.315 


7.255 


6.112 


1.143 


6.262 


5.497 


.765 


April, . 




6.750 


5.500 


1.250 


8.406 


7.375 


1.031 


6.132 


5.484 


.648 


May, . 




6.750 


5.480 


1.270 


8.550 


7.312 


1.238 


6.140 


5.437 


.703 


June, . 




6.808 


5.500 


1.305 


9.100 


8.025 


1.075 


6.437 


5.449 


.988 


July, . 




7.625 


5.893 


1.732 


9.062 


7.937 


1.125 


6.220 


5.437 


.783 


August, 




7.550 


6.245 


1.305 


8.300 


6.912 


1.388 


6.142 


5.609 


.533 


September, 




7.656 


6.490 


1.166 


8.000 


6.375 


1.625 


6.600 


5.987 


.613 


October, 




7.490 


6.187 


1.303 


7.235 


6.046 


1.189 


6.592 


5.968 


.624 


November, 




7.250 


6.240 


1.010 


6.890 


5.734 


1.156 


6.187 


5.501 


.626 


December, 




7.250 


6.200 


1.050 


6.750 


6.000 


.750 


6.050 


5.287 


.763 


Yearly averages, . 


7.150 


5.886 


1.264 


7.799 


6.586 


1.213 


6.296 


5.587 


.709 


Net cash, . 


7.007 


5.749 


1.258 


7.640 


6.433 


1.207 


6.171 


5.451 


.720 



Comparative Quotation of Raw and Refined Sugars, etc 


— Con. 




1891. 


1892. 


1893. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 

Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January. 


5.930 


5.276 


.654 


3.980 


3.476 


.504 


4.600 


3.470 


1.130 


February, 




6.320 


5.590 


.730 


3.920 


3.432 


.487 


4.553 


3.424 


1.129 


March, 




5.968 


5.200 


.768 


4.222 


3.306 


.916 


4.534 


3.443 


1.091 


April, . 




4.500 


3.516 


.984 


4.230 


3.125 


1.105 


4.915 


3.844 


1.072 


May, . 




4.326 


3.250 


1.076 


4.220 


3.090 


1.130 


5.110 


4.118 


.992 


June, . 




4.137 


3.375 


.762 


4.256 


3.123 


1.133 


5.220 


4.375 


.846 


July. . 




4.265 


3.357 


.908 


4.190 


3.093 


1.097 


5.257 


4.170 


1.087 


August, 




4.154 


3.424 


.730 


4.320 


3.232 


1.088 


5.080 


3.650 


1.430 


September, 




4.337 


3.428 


.909 


4.862 


3.611 


1.251 


5.080 


3.740 


1.340 


October, 




4.233 


3.349 


.884 


4.720 


3.470 


1.250 


5.080 


3.938 


1.142 


November, 




4.137 


3.485 


.652 


4.630 


3.375 


1.255 


4.472 


3.170 


1.302 


December, 




4.072 


3.485 


.581 


4.600 


3.401 


1.999 


4.204 


2.925 


1.279 


Yearly averages, . 


4.698 


3.894 


.804 


4.346 


3.311 


1.035 


4.842 


3.689 


1.153 


Net cash, 


4.691 


3.863 


.828 


- 


- 


_ 


- 


- 


- 



650 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Comparative Quotation of Raw and Refined Sugars, etc. — Con. 









1894. 


1895. 


1896. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


3.933 


2.875 


1.058 


3.740 


3.024 


.716 


4.646 


3.800 


.846 


February, 






4.114 


3.237 


.877 


3.720 


3.054 


.666 


4.685 


4.031 


.654 


March, 






4.102 


3.083 


1.019 


3.835 


3.000 


.835 


4.801 


4.162 


.639 


April, . 






3.978 


2.828 


1.150 


3.872 


3.000 


.872 


5.148 


4.296 


.852 


May, . 






3.905 


2.844 


1.061 


4.411 


3.281 


1.130 


4.993 


4.125 


.868 


June, . 






3.930 


3.094 


.836 


4.350 


3.311 


1.139 


4.634 


3.637 


.997 


July, . 






4.148 


3.136 


1.011 


4.350 


3.250 


1.100 


4.429 


3.359 


1.070 


August, 






4.544 


3.437 


1.107 


4.268 


3.280 


.988 


4.512 


3.375 


1 . 137 


September, 






4.597 


3.750 


.847 


4.317 


3.327 


.990 


4.412 


3.092 


1.320 


October, 






4.313 


3.625 


' .688 


4.432 


3.578 


.854 


3.920 


3.062 


.858 


November, 






4.034 


3.500 


.534 


4.254 


3.377 


.877 


4.117 


3.300 


.817 


December, 






3.755 


3.250 


.505 


4.442 


3.562 


.880 


4.100 


3.215 


.885 



Comparative Quotation of Raw and Refined Sugars, etc. — Con. 







1897. 


1898. 


1899. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 
February, 
March, 
April, . 
May, . 
June, . 
July, . 
August, 
September, 
October, 
November, 
December, 




4.040 
4.070 
4.229 
4.290 
4.257 
4.453 
4.648 
4.720 
4.824 
4.807 
4.720 
4.870 


3.180 
3.220 
3.273 
3.387 
3.280 
3.494 
3.625 
3.750 
3.908 
3.842 
3.842 
4.079 


.860 
.850 
.956 
.903 
.977 
.959 
1.023 
.970 
.916 
.965 
.878 
.791 


4.920 
4.960 
4.852 
5.009 
5.097 
5.080 
5.080 
5.094 
5.178 
4.740 
4.888 
4.817 


4.120 
4.167 
4.087 
4.156 
4.230 
4.280 
4.125 
4.275 
4.342 
4.237 
4.411 
4.391 


.800 
.793 
.765 
.853 
.867 
.800 
.965 
.819 
.836 
.503 
.477 
.426 


4.706 
4.720 
4.820 
4.920 
5.080 
5.190 
5.210 
5.137 
4.889 
4.795 
4.795 
4.795 


4.290 
4.331 
4.384 
4.541 
4.656 
4.617 
4.454 
4.530 
4.387 
4.310 
4.260 
4.250 


.416 
.389 
.436 
.379 
.424 
.573 
.756 
.607 
.509 
.485 
.535 
.545 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



651 



Comparative Quotation of Raw and Refined Sugars, etc. — Con. 




1 Prices from 1900 to 1909 computed from quotations in Willet & Gray's "Weekly Statistical 
Sugar Trade Journal," January 6, 1910. 



Comparative Quotation of Raw and Refined Sugars, etc. — Con. 











1903. 




1904. 


1905. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 

Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 
Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, . . 1 4.628 


3.825 


.803 


4.340 


3.382 


.958 


5.820 


5.060 


.760 


February, 




4.565 


3.703 


.862 


4.260 


3.373 


.887 


5.925 


5.047 


.878 


March, 




; 4.675 


3.719 


.956 


4.430 


3.495 


.935 


5.900 


4.976 


.924 


April, . 




4.662 


3.606 


1.056 


4.462 


3.638 


.824 


5.900 


4.795 


1.105 


May, . 






4.750 


3.673 


1.077 


4.662 


3.822 


.840 


5.675 


4.460 


1.215 


June, . 






4.750 


3.582 


1.168 


4.762 


3.901 


.861 


5.537 


4.327 


1.210 


July, . 






4.800 


3.632 


1.168 


4.840 


3,940 


.900 


5.120 


4.100 


1.020 


August, 






4.875 


3.781 


m 1.094 


! 4.975 


4.171 


.804 


5.087 


4.077 


1.010 


September, 




4.840 


3.889 


.951 


4.980 


4.295 


.685 


4.820 


3.838 


.982 


October, 




4.537 


3.869 


.668 


4.850 


4.247 


.603 


4.500 


3.579 


.921 


November, 




' 4.452 


3.780 


.672 


5.200 


4.549 


.651 


4.375 


3.482 


.893 


December, 




4.340 


3.610 


.730 


5.460 


4.825 


.635 


4.450 


3.597 


.853 



652 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May ; 



Comparative Quotation of Raw and Refined Sugars, etc. — Con. 











1906. 




1907. 


1908. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° Di 

Centrif- ^ 

ugal. ei 


ffer- 
ice. 


Granu- 
lated. 


96° 

Centrif- 
ugal. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Centrif- fr- 
ugal. ence - 


January, 


4.430 


3.637 


793 


4.592 


3.532 


1.060 


4.710 


3.851 


859 


February, 






4.325 


3.395 


930 


4.562 


3.415 


1.147 


4.650 


3.744 


906 


March, 






4.425 


3.477 


948 


4.550 


3.485 


1.065 


4.975 


4.106 


869 


April, . 






4.430 


3.465 


965 


4.600 


3.684 


.916 


5.310 


4.402 


908 


May, . 






4.387 


3.450 


937 


4.750 


3.844 


.906 


5.262 


4.303 


959 


June, . 






4.425 


3.480 


945 


4.850 


3.795 


1.055 


5.225 


4,330 


895 


July, . 






4.530 


3.710 


820 


4.780 


3.864 


.916 


5.230 


4.328 


902 


August, 






4.700 


3.872 


828 


4.650 


3.917 


.733 


4.975 


4.046 


929 


September, 






4.710 


4.055 


655 


4.650 


3.938 


.712 


4.950 


3.946 1 


004 


October, 






4.625 


4.000 


625 


4.650 


3.925 


.725 


4.830 


3.990 


840 


November, 






4.550 


3.827 


723 


4.625 


3.825 


.800 


4.610 


3.942 


668 


December, 






4.606 


3.861 


745 


4.560 


3.760 


.800 


4.540 


3.778 


762 



Comparative Quotation of Raw and Refined Sugars, etc. 


— Con. 




1909. 


MONTHS. 


Granulated. 


96° Centrifugal. 


Difference. 


January, 


4.490 


3.706 


.784 


February, 












4.437 


3.649 


.788 


March, 












4.600 


3.843 


.757 


April, . 














4.820 


3.908 


.912 


May, . 














4.790 


3.912 


.878 


June, . 














4.712 


3.875 


.837 


July, . 














4.710 


3.939 


.771 


August, 














4.825 


4.087 


.738 


September, 








' 






4.900 


4.210 


.690 


October, 














4.887 


4.276 


.611 


November, 














4.987 


4.382 


.605 


December, 














4.920 


4.171 


.749 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



653 



Sugar Production of the World. 



Years. 


Long Tons. 


Years. 


Long Tons. 


1884-85 


5,099,255 


1897-98 


7,660,068 


1885-86, 










4,888,340 


1898-99, 










7,931,275 


1886-87, 










5,513,278 


1899-1900, 










8,560,109 


1887-88, 










5,084,981 


1900-01, 










9,618,333 


1888-89, 










5,224,379 


1901-02, 










10,895,588 


1889-90, 










6,054,209 


1902-03, 










9,804,339 


1890-91, 










6,524,609 


1903-04, 










12,271,659 


1891-92, 










6,683,497 


1904-05, 










11,753,583 


1892-93, 










6,431,609 


1905-06, 










13,959,542 


1893-94, 










7,379,862 


1906-07, 










14,520,335 


1894-95, 










8,247,553 


1907-08, 










13,914,994 


1895-96, 










7,056,401 


1908-09, 










14,545,641 


1896-97, 










7,718,279 


1909-10, . 






14,418,500 



Consumption of Sugar in the United States. 



Years. 


Long Tons. 


Per 

Capita 
(Pounds). 


Years. 


Long Tons. 


Per 

Capita 

(Pounds). 


1885, 




1,254,116 


49.95 


1898, 




2,002,902 


60.30 


1886, 








1,355,809 


52.55 


1899, 






2,078,068 


61.00 


1887, 








1,392,909 


53.11 


1900, 






2,219,847 


66.60 


1888, 








1,457,264 


54.23 


1901, 






2,372,316 


69.70 


1889, 








1,439,701 


52.64 


1902, 






2,566,108 


72.80 


1890, 








1,522,731 


54.56 


1903, 






2,549,642 


70.90 


1891, 








1,872,400 


67.46 


1904, 






2,767,162 


75.30 


1892, 








1,853,370 


63.76 


1905, 






2,632,216 


70.50 


1893, 








1,905,862 


63.83 


1906, 






2,864,013 


76.10 


1894, 








2,012,714 


66.64 


1907, 






2,993,979 


77.54 


1895, 








1,949,744 


'64.23 


1908, 






3,185,789 


81.17 


1896, 








1,940,086 


60.90 


1909, 






3,257,660 


81.80 


1897, 








2,070,978 


63.50 









654 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



English Prices of Sugar, 1885-1909. Raw, Java, Afloat, No. 15, D. S. 
(96 Test), United Kingdom Terms, Refined Tate's Cubes. (Cents per 
Pound.) 

[From Willet & Gray's "Weekly Statistical Sugar Trade Journal," January 4, 1900, December 
27, 1906, and December 30, 1909.] 







1885. 


1886. 


1887. 


MONTHS. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


4.47 


3.05 


1.42 


5.02 


3.71 


1.31 


4.14 


2.97 


1.17 


February, 




4.47 


3.11 


1.36 


4.75 


3.51 


1.24 


4.14 


2.94 


1.20 


March, 




4.53 


3.32 


1.21 


4.58 


3.38 


1.20 


4.09 


2.78 


1.31 


April, . 




4.47 


3.32 


1.15 


4.58 


3.27 


1.31 


4.14 


2.94 


1.20 


May, . 




4.63 


3.38 


1.25 


4.69 


3.38 


1.31 


4.09 


2.97 


1.12 


June, . 




5.23 


4.09 


1.14 


4.36 


2.94 


1.42 


4.09 


2.92 


1.17 


July, . 




5.02 


3.98 


1.04 


4.41 


2.97 


1.44 


4.20 


3.02 


1.18 


August, 




4.80 


3.66 


1.14 


4.36 


2.89 


1.47 


4.14 


3.02 


1.12 


September, 




4.85 


3.98 


.87 


4.36 


2.89 


1.47 


4.26 


3.11 


1.15 


October, 




4.80 


3.87 


.93 


4.36 


3.00 


1.36 


4.20 


3.05 


1.15 


November, . 


4.80 


3.76 


1.04 


4.36 


2.86 


1.50 


4.36 


3.24 


1.12 


December, . 


4.91 


3.87 


1.04 


4.26 


3.00 


1.26 


4.80 


3.79 


1.01 



English Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 







1888. 


1889. 


1890. 


MONTHS. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


4.85 


3.82 


1.03 


4.69 


3.73 


.96 


4.36 


3.27 


1.09 


February, 




4.64 


3.57 


1.07 


4.69 


3.57 


1.12 


4.25 


3.22 


1.03 


March, 




4.53 


3.44 


1.09 


4.75 


3.71 


1.04 


4.41 


3.27 


1.14 


April, . 




4.47 


3.40 


1.07 


5.13 


4.15 


.98 


4.31 


3.22 


1.09 


May, . 




4.53 


3.38 


1.15 


6.00 


5.13 


.87 


4.41 


3.24 


1.17 


June, . 




4.47 


3.35 


1.12 


5.83 


5.13 


.70 


4.25 


3.19 


1.06 


July, . 




4.58 


3.46 


1.12 


6.32 


5.45 


.87 


4.14 


3.19 


.95 


August, 




4.58 


3.43 


1.15 


5.78 


4.80 


.98 


4.31 


3.27 


1.04 


September, 




4.73 


3.60 


1.13 


5.23 


3.65 


1.58 


4.31 


3.44 


.87 


October, 




4.58 


3.49 


1.09 


4.80 


3.38 


1.42 


4.14 


3.38 


.76 


November, 




4.58 


3.49 


1.09 


4.47 


3.16 


1.31 


4.14 


3.33 


.81 


December, 




4.80 


3.71 


1.09 


4.58 


3.32 


1.26 


4.20 


3.24 


.96 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



655 



English Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 







1891. 


1892. 




1893. 




MONTHS. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


4.36 


3.27 


1.09 


4.69 


3.54 


1.52 


4.58 


3.57 


1.01 


February, 




4.25 


3.24 


1.01 


4.58 


3.46 


1.12 


4.63 


3.60 


1.03 


March, 




4.47 


3.41 


1.06 


4.58 


3.46 


1.12 


4.53 


3.60 


.97 


April, . 




4.47 


3.44 


1.03 


4.58 


3.44 


1.14 


4.80 


3.79 


1.01 


May, . 




4.36 


3.33 


1.03 


4.41 


3.38 


1.03 


5.13 


4.09 


1.04 


June, . 




4.36 


3.27 


1.09 


4.36 


3.36 


1.00 


5.13 


4.25 


.88 


July, . 




4.41 


3.33 


1.08 


4.36 


3.33 


1.03 


5.35 


4.36 


.99 


August, 




4.53 


3.27 


1.26 


4.36 


3.33 


1.03 


5.13 


3.87 


1.26 


September, 




4.47 


3.24 


1.23 


4.41 


3.38 


1.03 


4.80 


3.65 


1.15 


October, 




4.41 


3.27 


1.14 


4.31 


3.36 


.95 


4.80 


3.71 


1.09 


November, 




4.41 


3.38 


1.03 


4.53 


3.33 


1.20 


4.58 


3.44 


1.14 


December, 




4.69 


3.65 


1.04 


4.89 


3.57 


1.12 


4.58 


3.38 


1.20 



English Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 









1894. 


1895. 


1896. 


MONTHS. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. Di 
er 


ffer- 
Lce. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


4.47 


3.38 


1.09 


3.38 


2.48 


90 


3.82 


2.81 


1.01 


February, 






4.36 


3.33 


1.03 


3.38 


2.40 


98 


3.98 


2.95 


1.03 


March, 






4.36 


3.38 


.98 


3.38 


2.40 


98 


3.98 


3.06 


.92 


April, . 






4.25 


3.36 


.89 


3.27 


2.51 


76 


3.92 


3.00 


.92 


May, . 






4.14 


3.26 


.88 


3.44 


2.56 


88 


3.92 


3.00 


.92 


June, . 






4.03 


2.94 


1.09 


3.49 


2.56 


93 


3.71 


2.84 


.87 


July, . 






4.03 


2.94 


1.09 


3.38 


2.51 


87 


3.60 


2.62 


.98 


August, 






4.03 


2.89 


1.14 


3.44 


2.56 


88 


3.49 


2.54 


.95 


September, 






3.92 


3.05 


.87 


3.44 


2.56 


88 


3.38 


2.51 


.87 


October, 






3.71 


2.89 


.82 


3.82 


2.70 1 


12 


3.33 


2.35 


.98 


November, 






3.60 


2.62 


* .98 


3.76 


2.81 


95 


3.33 


2.40 


.93 


December, 






3.49 


2.56 


.93 


3.71 


2.75 


96 


3.33 


2.59 


.74 



656 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



English Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 







1897. 


1898. 


1899. 


MONTHS. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


3.33 


2.51 


.82 


3.33 


2.46 


.87 


3.38 


2.56 


.82 


February, 




3.33 


2.42 


.91 


3.22 


2.37 


.85 


3.33 


2.45 


.88 


March, 




3.33 


2.40 


.93 


3.22 


2.37 


.85 


3.27 


2.56 


.71 


April, . 




3.33 


2.40 


.93 


3.22 


2.40 


.82 


3.33 


2.62 


.71 


May, . 




3.33 


2.29 


1.04 


3.38 


2.62 


.76 


3.54 


2.73 


.81 


June, . 




3.33 


2.29 


1.04 


3.38 


2.70 


.68 


3.52 


2.84 


.68 


July, . 




3.27 


2.26 


1.01 


3.33 


2.67 


.66 


3.49 


2.78 


.71 


August, 




3.16 


2.29 


.87 


3.27 


2.51 


.76 


3.48 


2.75 


.74 


September, 




3.26 


2.40 


.86 


3.33 


2.59 


.74 


3.46 


2.70 


.76 


October, 




3.16 


2.40 


.76 


3.33 


2.56 


.77 


3.44 


2.54 


.90 


November, 




3.16 


2.32 


.84 


3.38 


2.37 


1.01 


3.44 


2.46 


.98 


December, 




3.16 


2.34 


.82 


3.46 


2.64 


.82 


3.38 


2.46 


.92 







English Prices of Sugar, etc. 


— Cor 


1. 










1900. 


1901. 


1902. 


MONTHS. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


3.42 


2.45 


.97 


3.46 


2.56 


.90 


3.89 


1.91 


1.98 


February, 




3.37 


2.45 


.92 


3.45 


2.56 


.89 


3.83 


1 


80 


2.03 


March, 




3.36 


2.61 


.75 


3.58 


2.56 


1.02 


3.82 


1 


85 


1.97 


April, . 




3.45 


2.67 


.78 


4.06 


2.52 


1.54 


3.84 


1 


80 


2.04 


May, . 




3.49 


2.81 


.68 


4.27 


2.52 


1.75 


3.71 


1 


69 


2.02 


June, . 




3.51 


2.81 


.70 


4.25 


2.56 


1.69 


3.71 


1 


74 


1.97 


July, . 




3.71 


2.92 


.79 


4.15 


2.45 


1.70 


3.71 


1 


69 


2.02 


August, 




3.75 


3.02 


.73 


4.12 


2.37 


1.75 


3.71 


1 


66 


2.05 


September, 




3.64 


2.88 


.76 


4.00 


2.26 


1.74 


3.61 


1 


64 


1.97 


October, 




3.65 


2.83 


.82 


3.94 


2.12 


1.82 


3.72 


1 


74 


1.98 


November, 




3.64 


2.61 


1.03 


3.86 


1.88 


1.98 


3.83 


1 


96 


1.87 


December, 




3.57 


2.67 


.90 


3.88 


1.93 


1.95 


3.97 


2 


04 


1.93 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



657 



English Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 









1903. 


1904. 


1905. 


MONTHS. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


I Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 

1 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


4.13 


2.07 


2.06 


3.88 


1.99 


1.89 


5.56 


3.38 


2.18 


February, 






3.90 


2.02 


1.88 


3.85 


1.88 


1.97 


5.55 


3.51 


2.04 


March, 






3.98 


2.07 


1.91 


3.92 


1.88 


2.04 


5.40 


3.49 


1.91 


April, 






3.99 


2.12 


1.87 


4.01 


2.04 


1.97 


5.26 


3.32 


1.94 


May, . 






3.97 


2.12 


1.85 


4.12 


2.15 


1.97 


4.87 


3.10 


1.77 


June, . 






3.90 


2.12 


1.78 


4.12 


2.29 


1.83 


4.92 


2.89 


2.03 


July, . 






3.87 


2.02 


1.85 


4.17 


2.26 


1.91 


4.69 


2.72 


1.97 . 


August, 






4.03 


2.07 


1.96 


4.34 


2.34 


2.00 


4.59 


2.45 


2.14 


September, 






4.09 


2.12 


1.97 


4.46 


2.29 


2.17 


4.33 


2.20 


2.13 


October, 






4.05 


2.15 


1.90 


4.56 


2.67 


1.89 


4.31 


2.18 


2.13 


November, 






3.98 


2.18 


1.80 


5.05 


2.83 


2.22 


4.35 


1.96 


2.39 


December, 






3.96 


2.06 


1.90 


5.25 


3.21 


2.04 


4.09 


2.02 


2.07 



English Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 







1906. 


1907. 




1908. 




MONTHS. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Tate's 
Cubes. 


Java. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


4 03 


1.99 


2.04 


4.12 


2.18 


1.94 


4.33 


2.40 


1.93 


February, 




3.97 


1.96 


2.01 


4.09 


2.15 


1.94 


4.35 


2.34 


2.01 


March, 




4.07 


1.99 


2.08 


4.16 


2.18 


1.98 


4.51 


2.34 


2.17 


April, . 




4.08 


2.07 


2.01 


4.21 


2.23 


1.98 


4.68 


2.64 


2.04 


May, . 




3.98 


2.04 


1.94 


4.36 


2.29 


2.07 


4.41 


2.78 


1.63 


June, . 




4.00 


1.96 


2.04 


4.30 


2.40 


1.90 


4.11 


2.69 


1.42 


July, . 




4.07 


2.04 


2.03 


4.30 


2.34 


1.96 


4.15 


2.67 


1.48 


August, 




4.17 


2.09 


2.08 


4.35 


2.29 


2.06 


4.01 


2.56 


1.45 


September, 




4.31 


2.29 


2.02 


4.40 


2.37 


2.03 


3.92 


2.31 


1.61 


October, 




4.20 


2.40 


1.80 


4.33 


2.34 


1.99 


3.94 


2.37 


1.57 


November, 




4.09 


2.23 


1.86 


4.25 


2.23 


2.02 


4.00 


2.42 


1.58 


December, 




j 4.10 


2.23 


1.87 


4.29 


2.23 


2.06 


3.97 


2.42 


1.55 



658 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



English Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 





1909. 


MONTHS. 


Tate's Cubes. 


Java. 


Difference. 


January, 

February, 

March, . . 

April, 

May 

June, 

July, 

August, 

September, 

October, 

November, 

December, 


4.01 
4.01 
4.09 
4.10 
4.11 
4.12 
4.11 
4.31 
4.37 
4.32 
4.49 
4.58 


2.37 
2.37 
2.40 
2.48 
2.48 
2.51 
2.48 
2.48 
2.61 
2.64 
2.78 
2.97 


1.64 
1.64 
1.69 
1.62 
1.63 
1.61 
1.63 
1.83 
1.76 
1.68 
1.71 
1.61 



Average Monthly German Prices of Sugar, 1889-1909. German Beet Root 
(Raw Sugar), 88 Per Cent. Analysis, Prompt F. 0. B., Hamburg; 
Granulated, First Marks Quality, F. 0. B. Hamburg. (Cents per 
Pound.) 

[From Willet & Gray's "Weekly Statistical Sugar Trade Journal," January 4, 1900, December 
27, 1906, and December 30, 1909.] 







1889. 


1890. 


1891. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


3.65 


3.01 


.64 


3.11 


2.52 


.59 


3.30 


2.70 


.60 


February, 




3.54 


3.01 


.53 


3.11 


2.55 


.56 


3.32 


2.82 


.50 


March, 




3.65 


3.22 


.43 


3.22 


2.70 


.52 


3.44 


2.98 


.46 


April, . 




4.22 


3.79 


.43 


3.16 


2.59 


.57 


3.38 


3.03 


.35 


May, . 




5.13 


4.65 


.48 


3.32 


2.72 


.60 


3.32 


2.90 


.42 


June, . 




5.18 


4.87 


.31 


3.27 


2.68 


.59 


3.27 


2.89 


.38 


July, . 




5.28 


4.94 


.32 


3.24 


2.89 


.35 


3.24 


2.89 


.35 


August, 




5.02 


4.28 


.74 


3.38 


2.97 


.41 


3.30 


2.93 


.37 


September, 




4.09 


3.01 


1.08 


3.52 


3.04 


.48 


3.30 


2.92 


.38 


October, 




4.09 


2.72 


1.37 


3.49 


2.77 


.72 


3.32 


2.89 


.43 


November, 




3.16 


2.55 


.61 


3.44 


2.72 


.72 


3.35 


2.89 


.46 


December, 




3.27 


2.63 


.64 


3.30 


2.71 


.59 


3.49 


3.23 


.26 



1910.1 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



659 





Average Monthly 


German Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 








1892. 


1893. 




1894. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


ence. 


January, 


3.60 


3.22 


.38 


3.68 


3.12 


.56 


3.22 


2.74 


48 


February, 




3.68 


3.14 


.54 


3.68 


3.12 


.56 


3.24 


2.76 


48 


March, 




3.57 


3.08 


.49 


3.57 


3.05 


.52 


3.19 


2.78 


41 


April, . 




3.41 


2.89 


.52 


3.90 


3.49 


.41 


3.16 


2.72 


44 


May, . 




3.24 


2.79 


.45 


4.22 


3.96 


.26 


3.00 


2.52 


48 


June, . 




3.41 


2.86 


.55 


4.33 


3.95 


.38 


2.96 


2.58 


38 


July, . 




3.35 


2.82 


.53 


4.60 


3.98 


.62 


2.97 


2.56 


41 


August, 




3.41 


2.81 


.60 


4.36 


3.53 


.83 


2.96 


2.46 


50 


September, 




3.60 


3.05 


.55 


4.00 


3.15 


.85 


3.19 


2.62 


57 


October, 




3.52 


2.88 


.64 


3.95 


3.19 


.76 


2.84 


2.21 


63 


November, 




3.68 


3.08 


.60 


3.38 


2.88 


.50 


2.62 


2.17 


45 


December, 




3.62 


3.02 


.60 


3.24 


2.74 


.50 


2.50 


2.14 


36 



Average Monthly German Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 









1895. 


1896. 


1897. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, . . 2.21 


1.87 


.34 


j 2.78 


2.34 


.44 


2.46 


2.01 


.45 


February, 






2.40 


2.03 


.37 


| 2.89 


2.56 


.33 


2.43 


1 


96 


.47 


March, 






2.39 


2.00 


.39 


2.97 


2.68 


.29 


2.29 


1 


92 


.37 


April, . 






2.36 


2.02 


.34 


3.00 


2.70 


.30 


2.32 


1 


96 


.36 


May, . 






2.58 


2.13 


.45 


! 2.98 


2.67 


.31 


2.32 


1 


94 


.38 


June, . 






2.63 


2.18 


.45 


i 2.74 


2.30 


.44 


2.32 


1 


89 


.43 


July, . 






2.64 


2.11 


.53 


j 2.62 


2.17 


.45 


2.33 


1 


85 


.48 


August, 






2.88 


2.16 


.72 


2.59 


2.16 


.43 


2.30 


1 


85 


.45 


September, 




: 2.62 


2.07 


.55 


2.41 


1.97 


.44 


2.43 


1 


94 


.49 


October, 




1 3.00 


2.36 


.64 


2.33 


1.91 


.42 


2.33 


1 


89 


.44 


November, 




i 2.69 


2.29 


.40 


2.36 


1.99 


.37 


2.29 


1 


85 


.44 


December, 




2.70 


2.29 


.41 


2.37 


2.00 


.37 


! 2.37 


1 


96 


.41 



660 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Average Monthly German Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 









1898. 


1899. 


1900. i 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


2.40 


2.04 


.36 


2.40 


2.06 


.34 


2.42 


2.00 


.42 


February, 






2.36 


1.98 


.38 


2.44 


2.13 


.31 


2.42 


2.12 


.30 


March, 






2.41 


2.03 


.38 


2.41 


2.11 


.30 


2.42 


2.11 


.31 


April, . 






2.39 


1.97 


.42 


2.50 


2.21 


.29 


2.53 


2.20 


.33 


May, . 






2.41 


2.02 


.39 


2.73 


2.45 


.28 


2.64 


2.30 


.34 


June, . 






2.50 


2.12 


.38 


2.73 


2.41 


.32 


2.70 


2.34 


.36 


July, . 






2.37 


2.03 


.34 


2.58 


2.26 


.32 


2.78 


2.44 


.34 


August, 






2.40 


2.04 


.36 


2.73 


2.37 


.36 


3.00 


2.56 


.44 


September, 






2.51 


2.08 


.43 


2.64 


2.19 


.45 


2.94 


2.46 


.48 


October, 






2.56 


2.09 


.47 


2.48 


2.06 


.42 


2.97 


2.18 


.79 


November, 






2.52 


2.09 


.43 


2.56 


1.98 


.58 


2.44 


2.06 


.38 


December, 






2.52 


2.21 


.31 


2.54 


1.95 


.59 


2.42 


2.12 


.30 



1 Prices from 1900 to 1909 computed from quotations in Willet & Gray's "Weekly Statistical 
Sugar Trade Journal," December 27, 1906, and December 30, 1909. 



Average Monthly German Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 







1901. 


1902. 


1903. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


2.36 


1.99 


.37 


1.82 


1.42 


.40 


2.01 


1.76 


.25 


February, 




2.45 


2.01 


.44 


1 


96 


1.46 


.50 


2.01 


1 


71 


.30 


March, 




2.51 


2.00 


.51 


1 


88 


1.44 


.44 


2.10 


1 


84 


.26 


April, . 




3.40 


1.94 


.46 


1 


77 


1.41 


.36 


2.04 


1 


77 


.27 


May, . 




2.34 


2.00 


.34 


1 


70 


1.36 


.34 


2.17 


1 


82 


.35 


June, . 




2.42 


2.06 


.36 


1 


66 


1.35 


.31 


2.12 


1 


80 


.32 


July, . 




2.40 


2.01 


.39 


1 


62 


1.31 


.31 


1.97 


1 


66 


.31 


August, 




2.40 


2.01 


.39 


1 


62 


1.31 


.31 


2.17 


1 


76 


.41 


September, 




2.26 


1.74 


.52 


1 


66 


1.31 


.35 


2.25 


1 


84 


.41 


October, 




2.26 


1.64 


.62 


1 


74 


1.46 


.28 


2.22 


1 


92 


.30 


November, 




1.82 


1.56 


.26 


1 


93 


1.63 


.30 


2.22 


1 


89 


.33 


December, . 


1.93 


1.57 


.36 


2 


06 


1.73 


.33 


2.18 


1 


82 


.36 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



661 



Average Monthly German Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 







1904. 


1905. 


1906. 


MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


2.18 


1.82 


.36 


3.53 


3.21 


.32 


2.18 


1.77 


.41 


February, 




2.15 


1.70 


.45 


3.84 


3.46 


.38 


2.19 


1.76 


.43 


March, 




2.20 


1.76 


.44 


3.70 


3.32 


.38 


2.25 


1.80 


.45 


April, . 




2.31 


1.86 


.45 


3.57 


3.20 


.37 


2.27 


1.82 


.45 


May, . 




2.34 


1.92 


.42 


3.28 


2.80 


.48 


2.29 


1.81 


.48 


June, . 




2.45 


2.04 


.41 


3.02 


2.59 


.43 


2.25 


1.74 


.51 


July, . 




2.45 


2.04 


.41 


2.87 


2.38 


.49 


2.29 


1.80 


.49 


August, 




2.51 


2.14 


.37 


2.67 


2.26 


.41 


2.34 


1.88 


.46 


September, 




2.77 


2.34 


.43 


2.46 


1.91 


.55 


2.51 


2.07 


.44 


October, 




2.85 


2.42 


.43 


2.56 


1.89 


.67 


2.55 


2.08 


.47 


November, 




3.05 


2.64 


.41 


2.23 


1.77 


.46 


i 2.29 


1.88 


.41 


December, 




3.35 


2.98 


.37 


2.22 


1.80 


.42 


2.34 


1.97 


.37 



Average Monthly German Prices of Sugar, etc. — Con. 







1907. 






1908. 




1 


1909. 




MONTHS. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Granu- 
lated. 


Raw. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


2.29 


1.92 


.37 


2.47 


2.17 


.30 


2.64 


2.19 


.45 


February, 




2.26 


1.91 


.35 


2.55 


2.15 


.40 


2.70 


2.20 


.50 


March, 




2.30 


1.95 


.35 


2.57 


2.19 


.38 


2.70 


2.20 


.50 


April, . 




2.37 


2.01 


.36 


2.83 


2.46 


.37 


2.66 


2.26 


.40 


May, . 




2.41 


2.06 


.35 


2.91 


2.57 


.34 


2.63 


2.25 


.38 


June, . 




2.49 


2.18 


.31 


2.87 


2.48 


.39 


2.77 


2.31 


.46 


July, . 




2.46 


2.11 


.35 


2.72 


2.44 


.28 


| 2.72 


2.27 


.45 


August, 




2.45 


2.12 


.33 


2.66 


2.30 


.36 


1 2.79 


2.33 


.46 


September, 




2.55 


2.18 


.37 


2.53 


2.07 


.46 


3.00 


2.52 


.48 


October, 




2.56 


2.10 


.46 


2.61 


2.07 


.54 


i 2.97 


2.59 


.38 


November, 




2.39 


2.03 


* .36 


; 2.56 


2.17 


.39 


2.98 


2.57 


.41 


December, 




2.37 


2.04 


.33 


2.61 


2.22 


.39 


3.20 


2.78 


.42 



662 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil at New York, and Crude Oil at 
Oil City, and the Difference between them, 1866-1909. {Cents per 
Gallon.) 

[Report of the Industrial Commission in 1900, Vol. I., pp. 648-650. Prices after 1899 furnished 
through the kindness of H. C. Folger.Jr., New York, at the request of John D. Archbold.] 









1866. 


1867. 


1868. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


57.87 


11.90 


45.97 


31.00 


4.46 


26.54 


24.75 


4.64 


20.11 


February, 






48.62 


10.47 


38.15 


28.25 


4.41 


23.84 


25.00 


5.36 


19.64 


March, 






40.87 


8.93 


31.94 


27.50 


4.17 


23.33 


25.75 


6.19 


19.56 


April, . 






40.12 


9.40 


30.72 


27.00 


4.64 


22.36 


26.25 


7.02 


19.23 


May, . 






43.00 


11.00 


32.00 


26.75 


5.59 


21.16 


29.62 


8.75 


20.87 


June, . 






41.87 


8.33 


33.44 


24.75 


4.52 


20.23 


31.37 


10.30 


21.07 


July, . 






39.50 


7.14 


32.36 


30.87 


6.25 


24.62 


34.25 


12.09 


22.16 


August, 






44.37 


8.93 


35.44 


29.25 


7.50 


21.75 


33.00 


10.30 


22.70 


September, 






44.62 


10.72 


33.90 


31.75 


8.08 


23.67 


31.00 


9.28 


21.72 


October, 






40.62 


8.08 


32.54 


34.50 


8.68 


25.82 


30.00 


9.82 


20.18 


November, 






35.75 


7.38 


28.37 


27.50 


6.07 


21.43 


30.87 


8.82 


22.05 


December, 




31.25 


4.64 


26.61 


24.75 


4.46 


20.29 


32.75 


10.12 


22.63 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 







1869. 


1870. 


1871. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


34.12 


13.69 


20.43 


31.37 


10.78 


20.59 


24.62 


9.52 


15.10 


February, 




36.37 


15.60 


20.77 


29.87 


11.01 


18.86 


25.12 


10.73 


14.39 


March, 




32.12 


14.28 


17.84 


27.00 


10.24 


16.76 


24.12 


10.12 


14.00 


April, . 




33.25 


13.57 


18.68 


26.50 


10.12 


16.38 


23.25 


9.41 


13.84 


May, . 




31.50 


12.73 


18.77 


27.50 


10.78 


16.72 


24.62 


10.89 


13.73 


June, . 




31.00 


11.90 


19.10 


27.00 


10.12 


16.88 


25.75 


10.95 


14.80 


July, . 




32.25 


12.80 


19.45 


26.00 


9.05 


16.95 


25.75 


11.43 


14.32 


August, 




32.50 


13.10 


19.40 


25.00 


7.55 


17.45 


24.37 


10.53 


13.84 


September, 




32.25 


13.10 


19.15 


26.12 


8.27 


17.85 


24.12 


10.83 


13.29 


October, 




32.87 


13.22 


19.65 


24.37 


7.68 


16.69 


23.75 


11.18 


12.57 


November, 




34.00 


13.81 


20.19 


23.00 


7.79 


15.21 


22.37 


9.76 


12.61 


December, 




31.12 


12.19 


18.93 


23.00 


8.09 


14.91 


23.00 


10.35 


12.65 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



663 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 







1872. 


1873. 


1874. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


22.37 


9.58 


12.79 


22.12 


5.65 


16.47 


13.50 


3.16 


10.34 


February, 




21.75 


8.87 


12.88 


19.62 


5.24 


14.38 


15.00 


4.52 


10.48 


March, 




22.62 


8.57 


14.05 


19.00 


5.00 


14.00 


14.87 


4.28 


10.59 


April, . 




21.75 


8.40 


13.35 


20.00 


5.83 


14.17 


15.62 


4.66 


10.96 


May, . 




23.37 


9.28 


14.09 


19.75 


5.95 


13.80 


13.87 


2.74 


11.13 


June, . 




23.00 


9.43 


13.57 


19.00 


5.18 


13.82 


12.87 


2.82 


10.05 


July, . 




22.37 


8.75 


13.62 


18.12 


4.31 


13.81 


12.12 


2.40 


9.72 


August, 




22.37 


8.27 


14.10 


16.50 


3.19 


13.31 


11.75 


2.38 


9.37 


September, 




24.12 


7.50 


16.62 


16.50 


3.04 


13.46 


12.12 


2.32 


9.80 


October, 




26.00 


9.94 


16.06 


16.25 


2.95 


13.31 


11.75 


2.08 


9.67 


November, 




27.00 


10.35 


16.65 


. 14.12 


2.56 


11.56 


10.75 


1.73 


9.02 


December, 




26.00 


7.83 


18.17 


13.50 


2.32 


11.18 


11.25 


2.08 


9.17 





Prices per 


Gallon 


of Refined Export 


Oil, etc. — Con. 








1875. 




1876. 






1877. 




MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence, i 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


12.37 


2.56 


9.87 


14.12 


4.25 


9.87 


! 24.00 


8.40 


15.60 


February, 




14.00 


3.60 


10.40 ; 


14.25 


4.79 


9.46 


! 18.62 


6.38 


12.24 


March, 




15.00 


3.88 


11.12 


14.50 


4.93 


9.57 


16.00 


6.37 


9.63 


April, . 




13.87 


3.32 


10.55 


14.00 


4.53 


9.47 


15.75 


6.18 


9.57 


May, . 




12.87 


2.78 


10.09 


14.12 


4.54 


9.58 


14.50 


5.33 


9.17 


June, . 




12.62 


2.67 


9.95 


14.75 


4.84 


9.91 


13.75 


4.64 


9.11 


July, . 




11.50 


2.05 


9.45 


16.87 


5.45 


11.42 


13.37 


5.25 


8.12 


August, 




11.25 


2.17 


9.08 | 


19.87 


6.54 


13.33 


13.62 


5.88 


7.74 


September, 




12.75 


3.10 


9.65 


26.00 


9.06 


16.94 


14.50 


5.68 


8.82 


October, 




14.12 


3.22 


10.90 . 


26.00 


7.86 


18.14 


; 14.62 


5.34 


9.28 


November, 




13.00 


3.18. 


9.82 


26.25 


7.92 


18.33 


! 13.25 


4.56 


8.69 


December, 




12.75 


3.32 


9.43 


29.37 


9.01 


20.36 


13.12 


4.30 


8.82 



664 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 







1878. 


1879. 


1880. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


12.12 


3.44 


8.58 


9.00 


2.45 


6.55 


7.87 


2.63 


5.24 


February, 




12.25 


3.95 


8.30 


9.37 


2.33 


7.04 


7.87 


2.46 


5.41 


March, 




11.62 


3.79 


7.83 


9.25 


2.05 


7.20 


7.75 


2.13 


5.62 


April, . 




11.37 


3.26 


8.11 


9.12 


1.87 


7.25 


7.62 


1.83 


5.79 


May, . 




11.25 


3.22 


8.03 


8.50 


1.80 


6.70 


7.62 


1.91 


5.71 


June, . 




11.25 


2.71 


8.54 


7.50 


1.64 


5.86 


9.62 


2.39 


7.23 


July, . 




10.75 


2.35 


8.40 


6.75 


1.66 


5.09 


9.87 


2.41 


7.46 


August, 




10.87 


2.40 


8.47 


6.62 


1.60 


5.02 


9.00 


2.16 


6.84 


September, 




10.25 


2.06 


8.19 


6.87 


1.65 


5.22 


10.62 


2.28 


8.34 


October, 




9.62 


1.96 


7.66 


7.50 


2.10 


5.40 


12.00 


2.31 


9.69 


November, 




9.12 


2.14 


6.98 


8.00 


2.51 


5.49 


10.50 


2.18 


8.32 


December, 




9.62 


2.28 


7.34 


8.62 


2.82 


5.80 


9.50 


2.21 


7.29 





Prices per 


Gallon 


of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 






1881. 


1882. 


1883. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


9.25 


2.27 


6.98 


7.00 


1.98 


5.02 


7.75 


2.20 


5.55 


February, 




9.25 


2.14 


7.11 


7.37 


2.03 


5.34 


7.87 


2.41 


5.46 


March, 




8.50 


1.98 


6.52 


7.37 


1.93 


5.44 


8.00 


2.32 


5.68 


April, . 




7.75 


2.01 


5.74 


7.37 


1.87 


5.50 


8.25 


2.21 


6.04 


May, . 




8.00 


1.95 


6.05 


7.50 


1.67 


5.83 


7.87 


2.36 


5.51 


June, . 




8.12 


1.94 


6.18 


7.50 


1.30 


6.20 


8.00 


2.79 


5.21 


July, . 




7.87 


1.83 


6.04 


6.75 


1.37 


5.38 


7.62 


2.57 


5.05 


August, 




7.75 


1.88 


5.87 


6.87 


1.40 


5.47 


7.87 


2.59 


5.28 


September, 




8.00 


2.20 


5.80 


7.50 


1.69 


5.81 


8.12 


2.68 


5.44 


October, 




7.75 


2.21 


5.54 


8.00 


2.23 


5.77 


8.37 


2.65 


5.72 


November, 




7.50 


1.97 


5.53 


8.25 


2.73 


5.52 


8.75 


2.73 


6.02 


December, 




7.12 


2.00 


5.12 


7.62 


2.28 


5.34 


9.12 


2.72 


6.40 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



665 





Prices per 


Gallon 


of Refined Export 


Oil, etc. — Con. 




MONTHS. 




1884. 




1885. 


1886. 


Re- 

fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


9.37 


2.65 


6.72 


7.75 


1.69 


6.06 


7.75 


2.10 


5.65 


February, 




9.12 


2.50 


6.62 


7.75 


1.74 


6.01 


7.62 


1.91 


5.71 


March, 




8.50 


2.39 


6.11 


8.00 


1.91 


6.09 


7.37 


1.84 


5.53 


April, . 




8.62 


2.34 


6.28 


7.87 


1.88 


5.99 


7.37 


1.76 


5.61 


May, . 




8.50 


2.04 


6.46 


7.75 


1.89 


5.86 


7.25 


1.66 


5.59 


June, . 




8.12 


1.64 


6.48 


8.00 


1.96 


6.04 


7.12 


1.60 


5.52 


July, . 




7.87 


1.51 


6.36 


8.25 


2.30 


5.95 


7.00 


1.57 


5.43 


August, 




8.00 


1.93 


6.07 


8.37 


2.39 


5.98 


6.75 


1.48 


5.27 


September, 




7.87 


1.86 


6.01 


8.37 


2.40 


5.97 


6.62 


1.51 


5.11 


October, 




7.87 


1.69 


6.18 


8.50 


2.51 


5.99 


6.75 


1.55 


5.20 


November, 




7.87 


1.73 


6.14 


8.50 


2.48 


6.02 


6.87 


1.72 


5.15 


December, 




7.75 


1.77 


5.98 


8.00 


2.13 


5.87 


6.87 


1.69 


5.18 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 







1887. 


1888. 


1889. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


6.75 


1.69 


5.06 


7.75 


2.17 


5.58 


7.00 


2.05 


4.95 


February, 




6.62 


1.51 


5.11 


7.75 


2.14 


5.61 


7.12 


2.12 


5.00 


March, 




6.62 


1.51 


5.11 


7.75 


2.23 


5.52 


7.00 


2.16 


4.84 


April, . 




6.62 


1.54 


5.08 


7.37 


1.93 


5.44 


6.87 


2.09 


4.78 


May, . 




6.75 


1.53 


5.22 


7.50 


2.07 


5.43 


6.87 


1.98 


4.89 


June, . 




6.62 


1.49 


5.13 


7.12 


1.81 


5.31 


6.87 


2.03 


4.84 


July, . 




6.50 


1.41 


5.09 


7.25 


1.92 


5.33 


7.25 


2.26 


4.99 


August, 




6.50 


1.43 


5.07 


7.62 


2.06 


5.56 


7.25 


2.04 


5.21 


September, 




6.75 


1.60 


5.15 


7.75 


2.23 


5.52 


7.12 


2.05 


5.07 


October, 




6.75 


1.68 


5.07 


7.62 


2.16 


5.46 


7.12 


2.41 


4.71 


November, 




7.00 


1.76 


•5.24 


7.25 


2.04 


5.21 


7.50 


2.58 


4.92 


December, 




7.25 


1.90 


5.35 


7.25 


2.12 


5.13 


7.50 


2.48 


5.02 



666 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 









1890. 


1891. 


1892. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


7.50 


2.50 


5.00 


7.42 


1.76 


5.66 


6.45 


1.49 


4.96 


February, 






7.50 


2.50 


5.00 


7.48 


1.85 


5.63 


6.42 


1.43 


4.99 


March, 






7.25 


2.13 


5.12 


7.31 


1.77 


5.54 


6.32 


1.37 


4.95 


April, . 






7.12 


1.97 


5.15 


7.18 


1.69 


5.49 


6.10 


1.38 


4.72 


May, . 






7.25 


2.11 


5.14 


7.20 


1.66 


5.54 


6.06 


1.35 


4.71 


June, . 






7.12 


2.12 


5.00 


7.13 


1.62 


5.51 


6.00 


1.29 


4.71 


July, . 






7.12 


2.12 


5.00 


7.02 


1.58 


5.44 


6.00 


1.25 


4.75 


August, 






7.25 


2.12 


5.13 


6.70 


1.52 


5.18 


6.08 


1.31 


4.77 


September, 






7.37 


1.95 


5.42 


6.42 


1.39 


5.03 


6.10 


1.29 


4.81 


October, 






7.50 


1.91 


5.59 


6.45 


1.44 


5.01 


6.03 


1.22 


4.81 


November, 






7.50 


' 1.72 


5.78 


6.40 


1.41 


4.99 


5.80 


1.23 


4.57 


December, 






7.25 


1.60 


5.65 


6.44 


1.41 


5.03 


5.45 


1.27 


4.18 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 









1893. 


1894. 


1895. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


5.33 


1.27 


4.06 


5.15 


1.90 


3.25 


5.87 


2.35 


3.42 


February, 






5.30 


1.37 


3.93 


5.15 


1.91 


3.24 


6.00 


2.42 


3.58 


March, 






5.34 


1.55 


3.79 


5.15 


1.95 


3.20 


6.75 


2.55 


4.20 


April, . 






5.52 


1.63 


3.89 


5.15 


2.01 


3.14 


9.12 


4.22 


4.90- 


May, . 






5.20 


1.40 


3.80 


5.15 


2.05 


3.10 


8.20 


3.88 


4.42- 


June, . 






5.21 


1.44 


3.77 


5.15 


2.10 


3.05 


7.83 


3.59 


4.24 


July, . 






5.15 


1.37 


3.78 


5.15 


1.98 


3.17 


7.65 


3.45 


4.20. 


August, 






5.18 


1.40 


3.78 


5.15 


1.93 


3.22 


7.10 


2.98 


4.12 


September, 






5.15 


1.54 


3.61 


5.15 


1.98 


3.17 


7.10 


2.98 


4.12- 


October, 






5.15 


1.68 


3.47 


5.15 


1.97 


3.18 


7.10 


2.98 


4.12- 


November, 






5.15 


1.76 


3.39 


5.15 


1.97 


3.18 


7.88 


3.41 


4.47 


December, 






5.15 


1.87 


3.28 


5.61 


2.17 


3.44 


7.77 


3.42 


4.35 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



667 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 

1896. 1897. 1898. 







1896. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


7.85 


3.47 


4.38 


February, 




7.35 


3.31 


4.04 


March, 




7.40 


3.18 


4.22 


April, . 




7.00 


2.92 


4.08 


May, . 




6.75 


2.82 


3.93 


June, . 




6.85 


2.73 


4.12 


July, . 




6.55 


2.60 


3.95 


August, 




6.65 


2.50 


4.15 


September, 




6.85 


2.68 


4.17 


October, 




6.90 


2.74 


4.16 


November, 




7.15 


2.75 


4.40 


December, 




6.35 


2.33 


4.02 



, Re ^ l Crude. Differ " 
fined. ence. 



6.13 


2.10 


6.26 


2.15 


6.36 


2.19 


6.13 


2.05 


6.23 


2.06 


6.14 


2.05 


5.87 


1.85 


5.75 


1.69 


5.74 


1.66 


5.55 


1.61 


5.40 


1.55 


5.40 


1.55 



4.03 
4.11 
4.17 
4.08 
4.17 
4.09 
4.02 
4.06 
4.08 
3.94 
3.85 
3.85 



fi?e e "d. Crude - 



5.40 
5.50 
5.82 
5.67 
6.01 
6.16 
6.26 
6.44 
6.63 
7.21 
7.35 
7.42 



Differ- 
ence. 



1.50 
1.61 

1.87 
1.76 
1.96 
2.07 
2.22 
2.32 
2.42 
2.69 
2.77 
2.79 



3.90 
3.89 
3.95 
3.91 
4.05 
4.09 
4.04 
4.12 
4.21 
4.52 
4.58 
4.63 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 









1899. 


1900. 


1901. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


7.43 


2.78 


4.65 


9.75 


3.98 


5.77 


7.49 


2.86 


4.63 


February, 






7.40 


2.74 


4.66 


9.75 


4.00 


5.75 


7.77 


2.98 


4.79 


March, 






7.34 


2.69 


4.65 


9.75 


4.00 


5.75 


7.95 


3.07 


4.88 


April, . 






7.05 


2.69 


4.36 


9.23 


3.69 


5.54 


7.61 


2.86 


4.75 


May, . 






6.99 


2.69 


4.30 


8.52 


3.31 


5.21 


6.97 


2.57 


4.40 


June, . 






7.20 


2.70 


4.50 


7.82 


2.98 


4.84 


6.85 


2.50 


4.35 


July, . 






7.61 


2.92 


4.69 


7.86 


3.00 


4.86 


7.13 


2.71 


4.42 


August, 






7.82 


3.04 


4.78 


8.00 


3.00 


5.00 


7.45 


2.98 


4.47 


September, 






8.63 


3.44 


5.19 


7.91 


2.93 


4.98 


7.46 


2.98 


4.48 


October, 






9.00 


3.60 


5.40 ' 


7.41 


2.62 


4.79 


• 7.60 


3.10 


4.50 


November, 






9.40 


3.75 


' 5.65 


7.26 


2.55 


4.71 


7.60 


3.10 


4.50 


December, 






9.85 


4.13 


5.72 


7.25 


2.59 


4.66 


7.32 


2.88 


4.44 



668 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 









1902. 


1903. 


1904. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


January, 


7.15 


2.74 


4.41 


8.21 


3.64 


4.57 


8.70 


4.40 


4.30 


February, 






7.15 


2.74 


4.41 


8.15 


3.57 


4.58 


8.60 


4.33 


4.27 


March, 






7.15 


2.74 


4.41 


8.15 


3.57 


4.58 


8.27 


4.09 


4.18 


April, . 






7.26 


2.81 


4.45 


8.15 


3.60 


4.55 


7.99 


3.93 


4.06 


May, . 






7.35 


2.86 


4.49 


8.15 


3.62 


4.53 


7.75 


3.86 


3.89 


June, . 






7.35 


2.86 


4.49 


8.15 


3.57 


4.58 


7.62 


3.78 


3.84 


July, . 






7.29 


2.90 


4.39 


8.15 


3.64 


4.51 


7.35 


3.62 


3.73 


August, 






7.15 


2.90 


4.25 


8.15 


3.71 


4.44 


7.31 


3.57 


3.74 


September, 






7.15 


2.90 


4.25 


8.17 


3.74 


4.43 


7.48 


3.67 


3.81 


October, 






7.23 


3.05 


4.18 


8.64 


4.02 


4.62 


7.55 


3.71 


3.84 


November, 






7.70 


3.29 


4.41 


8.97 


4.26 


4.71 


7.55 


3.78 


3.77 


December, 






8.09 


3.55 


4.54 


9.03 


4.48 


4.55 


7.45 


3.74 


3.71 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 









1905. 


190S. 


1907. 


MONTHS. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Re- 
fined. 


Crude. 


Differ- 
ence. 


J anuary, 


7.02 


3.40 


3.62 


7.20 


3.76 


3.44 


6.94 


3.76 


3.18 


February, 






6.85 


3.31 


3.54 


7.20 


3.76 


3.44 


7.00 


3.83 


3.17 


March, 






6.82 


3.29 


3.53 


7.20 


3.76 


3.44 


7.18 


4.12 


3.06 


April, . 






6.66 


3.17 


3.49 


7.20 


3.81 


3.39 


7.25 


4.24 


3.01 


May, . 






6.54 


3.07 


3.47 


7.20 


3.90 


3.30 


7.25 


4.24 


3.01 


June, . 






6.50 


3.02 


3.48 


7.20 


3.90 


3.30 


7.46 


4.24 


3.22 


July, . 






6.50 


3.02 


3.48 


7.19 


3.90 


3.29 


7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


August, 






6.50 


3.02 


3.48 


6.99 


3.76 


3.23 


7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


September, 






6.83 


3.24 


3.59 


6.90 


3.76 


3.14 


7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


October, 






7.24 


3.76 


3.48 


6.90 


3.76 


3.14 


7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


November, 






7.23 


3.79 


3.44 


6.90 


3.76 


3.14 


7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


December, . 




7.20 


3.76 


3.44 


6.90 


3.76 


3.14 


7.50 


4.24 


3.26 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



669 



Prices per Gallon of Refined Export Oil, etc. — Con. 











1908. 




1909. 


MONTHS. 


Refined. 


Crude. 


Difference. 


Refined. 


Crude. 


Difference. 


January, 


7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


February, 






7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


March, . 






7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


April, 






i 7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


May, 






7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.50 


4.05 


3.45 


June, 






7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.48 


3.98 


3.50 


July, 






7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.32 


3.81 


3.51 


August, . 






7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.25 


3.76 


3.49 


September, 






7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.25 


3.76 


3.49 


October, . 






7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.21 


3.71 


3.50 


November, 






7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.07 


3.55 


3.52 


December, 






7.50 


4.24 


3.26 


7.05 


3.42 


3.63 



Proof Gallons of Spirits obtained from One Bushel of Corn. 

[From report of the Industrial Commission, 1900, Vol. L, pp. 815-817, and computed from the 
annual reports of the Collector of Internal Revenue, 1900-08.] 





Years. 


Proof 

Gallons per 

Bushel of 

Corn. 


Years. 


Proof 

Gallons per 

Bushel of 

Corn. 


1884 
1885 
1886 
1887 
1888 
1889 
1890 
1891 
1892 
1893 
1894 
1895 
1896 
















4.10 
4.45 
4.55 
4.62 
4.53 
4.64 
4.67 
4.71 
*4.62 
4.67 
4.77 
4.66 
4.68 


1897, . 

1898, . 

1899, . 
1900,i 

1901, . 

1902, . 

1903, . 

1904, . 

1905, . 

1906, . 

1907, . 

1908, . 












4.69 
4.80 
4.69 
4.79 
4.80 
4.83 
4.76 
4.79 
4.80 
4.81 
4.84 
4.97 



1 The annual reports of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue furnish the figures for the 
amount of spirits obtained from one bushel of grain. For the period 1890-99 the figures furnished 
by the "trust" show for corn 7.4 per cent, greater yield than the government figures for all grain. 
The figures furnished by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue have been increased 7.4 per 
cent, for purposes of comparison. 



670 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn, 188J/.-1908. 1 
1884. 



Months. 


Proof 

Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January, .... 


$1,159 


$0,259 


- 


$1,062 


$0,544 


$0,518 


February, 










1.169 


.269 


- 


1.102i 


.535 


.567 


March, 










1.117 


.•270 


- 


1.108 - 


.520 


.588 


April, 










1.164 


.274 


- 


1.122 


.501 


.621 


May, . 










1.120 


.220 


- 


.903 


.547 


.356 


June, 










1.090 


.190 


- 


.780 


.539 


.241 


July, . 










1.074 


.174 


- 


.714 


.528 


.186 


August, 










1.050 


.150 


- 


.615 


.530 


.085 


September, 








1.105 


.205 


- 


.841 


.694 


.147 


October, . 








1.110 


.210 


- 


.862 


.502 


.360 


November, 








1.118 


.218 


- 


.895 


.401 


.494 


December, 








1.120 


.220 


- 


.903 


.374 


.529 



1 The prices of spirits are those reported by the "trust." The prices of corn are those of the 
Chicago Board of Trade on which the price of spirits is based. Both these series of figures are 
taken for the most part from the reports of the Peoria Board of Trade, the principal distilleries 
of the "trust" being situated at Peoria. 



1885. 



January, .... 


$1,122 


$0,222 


- 


$0,988 


$0,372 


$0,616 


February, . 






1.140 


.240 


- 


1 


068 


.372 


.696 


March, 






1.140 


.240 


- 


1 


068 


.392 


.676 


April, . 






1.140 


.240 


- 


1 


068 


.447 


.621 


May, . 






1.140 


.240 


- 


1 


068 


.468 


.600 


June, 






1.140 


.240 


- 


1 


068 


.466 


.602 


July, . 






1.140 


.240 


- 


1 


068 


.466 


.602 


August, 






1.140 


.240 


- 


1 


068 


.452 


.616 


September, 






1.050 


.150 


- 




668 


.430 


.238 


October, . 






1.050 


.150 


- 




668 


.422 


.246 


November, 






1.090 


.190 


- 




846 


.432 


.414 


December, 






1.095 


.195 


- 




868 


.396 


.472 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



671 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn, etc. — Con. 
1886. 



Months. 


Proof 
Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January, .... 


$1 . 100 


$0,200 


- 


$0,910 


SO. 366 


$0,544 


February, 








1.100 


.200 


- 


.910 


.372 


.538 


March, 








1.100 


.200 


- 


.910 


.371 


.539 


April, 








1.100 


.200 


- 


.910 


.347 


.563 


May, . 








1.100 


.200 


- 


.910 


.355 


.555 


June, 








1.100 


.200 


- 


.910 


.347 


.563 


July, 








1.082 


.182 


- 


.828 


.347 


.581 


August, 








1.098 


.198 


- 


.902 


.420 


.582 


September, 






1.114 


.214 


- 


.975 


.387 


.588 


October, . 






1.140 


.240 


- 


1.092 


.349 


.743 


November, 






1.140 


.240 


- 


1.092 


.362 


.730 


December, 






1.140 


.240 


- 


1.092 


.369 


.723 



1887. 



January, .... 


$1,140 


$0,240 


- 


$1,108 


$0,365 


$0,743 


February, 








1.140 


.240 


- 


1.108 


.347 


.771 


March, 








1.140 


.240 


- 


1.108 


.357 


.751 


April, 








1.140 


.240 


- 


1.108 


.365 


.743 


May, . 








1.064 


.164 


- 


.758 


.379 


.379 


June, 








1.060 


.160 


- 


.739 


.371 


.368 


July, . 








1.050 


.150 


- 


.693 


.365 


.328 


August, 








1.050 


.150 


- 


.693 


.402 


.291 


September, 






1.050 


.150 


- 


.693 


.419 


.274 


October, . 






1.050 


.150 


- 


.693 


.417 


.276 


November, 






1.050 


.150 


- 


.693 


.442 


.251 


December, 






1.050 


.150 


- 


.693 


.488 


.205 



672 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May ; 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn, etc. — Con. 
1888. 



Months. 


Proof 
Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January, .... 


$1,090 


$0,190 


- 


$0,862 


$0,487 


$0,375 


February, 






1.090 


.190 


- 




862 


.472 


.390 


March, 








1.090 


.190 


- 




862 


.475 


.387 


April, 








1.090 


.190 


- 




862 


.519 


.343 


May, . 








1.103 


.203 


- 




920 


.572 


.348 


June, 








1.140 


.240 


- 




088 


.512 


.576 


July, . 








1.140 


.240 


- 




088 


.479 


.609 


August, 








1.140 


.240 


- 




088 


.453 


.635 


September, 






1.140 


.240 


- 




088 


.433 


.655 


October, 






1.140 


.240 


- - 




088 


.436 


.652 


November, 






1.140 


.240 


- 




088 


.363 


.725 


December, 






1.140 


.240 


- 




088 


.347 


.741 



1889. 



January 


$1,052 


$0,152 


- 


$0,706 


$0,343 


$0,363 


February, 








1.040 


.140 


- 


.650 


.345 


.305 


March, 








1.040 


.140 


- 


.650 


.345 


.305 


April, 








1.036 


.136 


- 


.632 


.344 


.288 


May, . 








1.030 


.130 


- 


.604 


.345 


.259 


June, 








1.030 


.130 


- 


.604 


.345 


.259 


July, . 








1.030 


.130 


- 


.604 


.360 


.244 


August, 








1.030 


.130 


- 


.604 


.347 


.257 


September, 






1.030 


.130 


- 


.604 


.322 


.282 


October, . 






1.030 


.130 


- 


.604 


.320 


.284 


November, 






1.030 


.130 


- 


.604 


.458 


.146 


December, 






1.030 


.130 


- 


.604 


.321 


.283 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



673 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn, etc. — Con. 
1890. 



Months. 


Proof 
Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January, .... 


SI. 030 


SO. 130 


- 


SO. 607 


$0,291 


$0,316 


February, 










1.030 


.130 


- 


.607 


.277 


.330 


March, 










1.030 


.130 


- 


.607 


.287 


.320 


April, 










1.030 


.130 


- 


.607 


.313 


.294 


May, . 










1.053 


.153 


- 


.715 


.339 


.376 


June, 










1.100 


.200 


$0.136i 


.635 


.339 


.296 


July, . 










1.109 


.209 


.145 1 


.677 


.402 


.275 


August, 










1.138 


.238 


.1741 


.812 


.480 


.332 


September, 








1.142 


.242 


.1781 


.831 


.507 


.324 


October, . 








1.142 


.242 


.1781 


.831 


.497 


.334 


November, 








1.150 


.250 


.1861 


.869 


.515 


.354 


December, 








1.150 


.250 


.1861 


.869 


.504 


.365 



1891. 



January, .... 


$1,150 


SO. 250 


SO. 186i 


$0,876 


$0,488 


$0,388 


February, 










1.150 


.250 


.1861 


.876 


.524 


.352 


March, 










1.630 


.263 


.1991 


.937 


.620 


.317 


April, 










1.178 


.278 


.2141 


1.008 


.709 


.299 


May, . 










1.176 


.276 


.2121 


.998 


.612 


.386 


June, 










1.170 


.270 


.2061 


.970 


.581 


.389 


July, . 










1.170 


.270 


.2061 


.970 


.615 


.355 


August, 










1.174 


.274 


.2101 


.989 


.632 


.357 


September, 








1.180 


.280 


.2161 


1.018 


.584 


.434 


October, 








1.180 


.280 


.2161 


1.018 


.552 


.466 


November, 








1.180 


.280 


.2161 


1.018 


.635 


.383 


December, 








1.180 


.280 


.1992 


.927 


.492 


.445 



Rebate, 6.4 cents. 



2 Rebate, 8.14 cents. 



674 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn, etc. — Con. 
1892. 



Months. 


Proof 
Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits, 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January, .... 


$1,173 


SO. 273 


$0.192i 


$0,888 


$0,383 


$0,505 


February, . 








1.142 


.242 


.1611 


.745 


.405 


.340 


March, 








1.133 


.233 


.1521 


.703 


.395 


.308 


April, 








1.130 


.233 


.1521 


.703 


.406 


.297 


May, . 








1.140 


.240 


.1591 


.735 


.703 


.032 


June, 








1.155 


.255 


.1741 


.805 


.508 


.297 


July, . 








1.150 


.250 


.1691 


.781 


.497 


.284 


August, 








1.150 


.250 


.1691 


.781 


.518 


.263 


September, 








1.150 


.250 


.1691 


.781 


.462 


.319 


October, . 








1.150 


.250 


.1691 


.781 


.425 


.356 


November, 








1.150 


.250 


.1691 


.781 


.415 


.366 


December, 








1.256 


.356 


.2751 


1.271 


.413 


.858 



1893. 



January, .... 


$1,331 


$0,431 


$0.350i 


$1,635 


$0,426 


$1,209 


February, 








1 . 170 


.270 


.1891 


.888 


.420 


.468 


March, 








1.170 


.270 


.1891 


.888 


.408 


.480 


April. 








1.143 


.243 


.1602 


.747 


.407 


.340 


May, . 








1.125 


.225 


.1422 


.653 


.420 


.243 


June, 








1.120 


.220 


.1372 


.640 


.395 


.245 


July, . 








1.120 


.220 


.137 2 


.640 


.389 


.251 


August, 








1.120 


.220 


.1372 


• .640 


.382 


.258 


September, 






1.120 


.220 


.1372 


.640 


.399 


.241 


October, . 






1.135 


.235 


.1522 


.710 


.390 


.320 


November, 






1.150 


.250 


.1672 


.780 


.372 


.408 


December, 






1.150 


.250 


.167 2 


.780 


.354 


.426 



1 Rebate, 8.14 cents. 



2 Rebate, 8 . 28 cents. 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



675 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn, etc. — Con. 
1894. 



Months. 


Proof 
Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January, .... 


$1,150 


$0,250 


$0.167i 


$0,797 


$0,349 


$0,448 


February 


1.150 


.250 


.1671 


.797 


.347 


.450 


March, .... 


1.150 


.250 


.1671 


.797 


.357 


.440 


April, .... 


1.150 


.250 


.1671 


.797 


.379 


.418 


May, 


1.150 


.250 


.1671 


.797 


.376 


.421 


June, .... 


1.154 


.254 


.1711 


.817 


.399 


.418 


July 


1.210 


.310 


.2271 


1.083 


.435 


.648 


August, .... 


1.254 


J" .354 
1 .154 


.2711 
.0711 


1.298 
.339 


.531 


f .767 
1 —.192 


September, 


1.330 


.230 


.1471 


.702 


.530 


.172 


October, .... 


1.240 


.140 


.1202 


.573 


.507 


.066 


November, 


1.230 


.130 


.no 2 


.525 


.500 


.025 


December, 


1.228 


.128 


.1082 


.516 


.461 


.055 



1895. 



January, .... 


$1,229 


$0,129 


SO. 1092 


$0,508 


$0,430 


$0,078 


February, 










1.200 


.100 


.1003 


.466 


.421 


.045 


March, 










1.227 


.127 


- 


.592 


.444 


.148 


April, 










1.203 


.103 


- 


.470 


.469 


.001 


May, . 










1.223 


.123 


- 


.573 


.518 


.057 


June, 










1.242 


.142 


- 


.662 


.500 


.162 


July, . 










1.237 


.137 


- 


.638 


.446 


.192 


August, 










1.212 


.112 


- 


.522 


.404 


.118 


September, 








1.190 


.090 


- 


.415 


.339 


.076 


October, 








1.191 


.091 


- 


.419 


.304 


.115 


November, 








1.195 


.095 


- 


.438 


.282 


.156 


December, 








1.195 


.095 


- 


.438 


.259 


.179 



Rebate, 8 28 cents. 



2 Rebate, 2 cents. 



3 No rebate. 



676 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn. etc. — Con. 
1896. 



Months. 


Proof 

Spirits Sai 
per less 
Gallon. 


ne 
Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January 


$1,215 $0 


115 


- 


$0,538 


$0,269 


$0,269 


February, 








1.215 


115 


- 


.538 


.285 


.243 


March, 








1.215 


115 


- 


.538 


.286 


.252 


April, 








1.215 


115 


- 


.538 


.296 


.242 


May, . 








1.215 


115 


- 


.538 


.285 


.253 


June, 








1.215 


115 


- 


.538 


.274 


.264 


July, . 








1.206 


106 


- 


.496 


.260 


.236 


August, 








1.196 


096 


- 


.450 


.227 


.223 


September 








1.192 


092 


- 


.431 


.209 


.222 


October, 








1.185 


085 


- 


.398 


.244 


.154 


November, 






1.185 


085 


- 


.398 


.241 


.157 


December, 






1.185 


085 


- 


.398 


.231 


.167 



1897. 



January, .... 


$1,170 


$0,070 


- 


$0,328 


$0,225 


$0,102 


February, 








1.165 


.065 


- 


.305 


.225 


.080 


March, 








1.165 


.065 


- 


.305 


.237 


.068 


April, 








1.182 


.082 


- 


.385 


.242 


.143 


May, . 








1.187 


.087 


- 


.408 


.242 


.166 


June, 








1.187 


.087 


- 


.408 


.244 


.164 


July, . 








1.187 


.087 


- 


.408 


.264 


.144 


August, 








1.192 


.092 


- 


.432 


.294 


.138 


September 








1.203 


.103 


- 


.483 


.296 


.187 


October, 








1.187 


.087 


- 


.408 


.265 


.143 


November, 






1.184 


.084 


- 


.394 


.267 


.127 


December, 






1.182 


.082 


- 


.385 


.262 


.123 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



677 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn, etc. — Con. 
1898. 



Months. 


Proof 
Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January 


$1,182 


$0,082 


- 


$0,394 


$0,271 


$0,123 


February, 










1.186 


.086 


- 


.413 


.289 


.124 


March, 










1.192 


.092 


- 


.442 


.289 


.153 


April, 










1.197 


.097 


- 


.466 


.321 


.145 


May, . 










1.219 


.119 


- 


.571 


.347 


.224 


June, 










1.224 


.124 


- 


.595 


.324 


.271 


July, . 










1.242 


.142 


- 


.682 


.336 


.346 


August, 










1.242 


.142 


- 


.682 


.317 


.365 


September, 








1.242 


.142 


- 


.682 


.302 


.380 


October, . 








1.242 


.142 


- 


.682 


.308 


.374 


November, 








1.245 


.145 


- 


.696 


.331 


.365 


December, 








1.252 


.152 


- 


.730 


.356 


.374 



1899. 



January, . 






$1,247 


$0,147 


- 


$0,689 


$0,367 


$0,322 


February, 










1.240 


.140 


- 


.656 


.352 


.304 


March, 










1.240 


.140 


- 


.656 


.346 


.310 


April, 










1.240 


.140 


- 


.656 


.347 


.309 


May, . 










1.240 


.140 


- 


.656 


.334 


.322 


June, 










1.240 


.140 


- 


.656 


.344 


.312 


July, . 










1.240 


.140 


- 


.656 


.329 


.327 


August, 










1.240 


.140 


- 


.656 


.317 


.339 


September, 








1.210 


.110 


- 


.516 


.331 


.185 


October, . 








1.220 


.120 


- 


.563 


.320 


.243 


November, 








1.226 


.126 


- 


.591 


.316 


.275 


December, 








1.225 


.125 


- 


.587 


.305 


.282 



678 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn, etc. — Con. 
1900. 



Months. 


Proof 
Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January, .... 


$1.2300 


$0.1300 


- 


$0.6227 


$0.3050 


$0.3177 


February, 










1.2300 


.1300 


- 


.6227 


.3150 


.3077 


March, 










1.2360 


.1360 


- 


.6514 


.3337 


.3177 


April, 










1.2490 


.1490 


- 


.7137 


.3875 


.3262 


May, . 










1.2450 


.1450 


- 


.6945 


.3600 


.3345 


June, 










1.2350 


.1350 


- 


.6467 


.3737 


.2730 


July, . 










1.2350 


.1350 


- 


.6467 


.3875 


.2592 


August, 










1.2375 


.1375 


- 


.6598 


.3725 


.2873 


September 










1.2475 


.1475 


- 


.7077 


.3887 


.3190 


October, 










1.2650 


.1650 


- 


.7903 


.3650 


.4253 


November 










1.2650 


.1650 


- 


.7903 


.3500 


.4403 


December, 








1.2650 


.1650 


- 


.7903 


.3525 


.4378 



1901. 



January, .... 


$1.2700 


$0.1700 


- 


$0.8162 


$0.3600 


$0.4562 


February, 










1.2700 


.1700 


- 


.8162 


.3725 


.4437 


March, 










1.2700 


.1700 


- 


.8162 


.3900 


.4262 


April, 










1.2700 


.1700 


- 


.8162 


.4100 


.4062 


May, . 










1.2775 


.1775 


- 


.8522 


.4262 


.4260 


June, 










1.2700 


.1700 


- 


.8162 


.4100 


.4062 


July, . 










1.2700 


.1700 


- 


.8162 


.4350 


.3812 


August, 










1.2960 


.1960 


- 


.9450 


.5375 


.4075 


September 










1.3000 


.2000 


- 


.9602 


.5412 


.4190 


October, 










1.3000 


.2000 


- 


.9602 


.5462 


.4140 


November 










1.3060 


.2060 


- 


.9890 


.5750 


.4140 


December, 






1.3200 


.2200 


- 


1.0562 


.6250 


.4312 

m 



1910.' 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



679 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn, etc. — Con. 
1902. 



Months. 


Proof 
Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January, .... 


$1.3200 


$0.2200 


- 


$1.0632 


$0.5650 


$0.4982 


February, 










1.3100 


.2100 


- 


1.0150 


.5662 


.4488 


March, 










1.3100 


.2100 


- 


1.0150 


.5600 


.4550 


April, 










1.3100 


.2100 


- 


1.0150 


.5675 


.4475 


May, . 










1.3100 


.2100 


- 


1.0150 


.5912 


.4248 


June, 










1.3100 


.2100 


- 


1.0150 


.6100 


.4050 


July, . 










1.3100 


.2100 


- 


1.0150 


.5600 


.4550 


August, 










1.3100 


.2100 


- 


1.0150 


.5400 


.4750 


September 










1.3200 


.2200 


- 


1.0632 


.5700 


.4832 


October, 










1.3200 


.2200 


- 


1.0632 


.5500 


.5132 


November 










1.3200 


.2200 


- 


1.0632 


.5200 


.5432 


December, 








1.3175 


.2175 


- 


1.0511 


.4375 


.6136 



1903. 



January 


$1,304 


$0,204 


- 


$0.9727 


$0.4375 


$0.5352 


February, 










1.300 


.200 


- 


.9536 


.4250 


.5286 


March, 










1.300 


.200 


- 


.9536 


.4137 


.5399 


April, 










1.300 


.200 


- 


.9536 


.4137 


.5399 


May, . 










1.300 


.200 


- 


.9536 


.4400 


.5136 


June, 










1.300 


.200 


- 


.9536 


.4725 


.4811 


July, . 










1.300 


.200 


- 


.9536 


.4900 


.4636 


August, 










1.282 


.182 


- 


.8678 


.5050 


.4628 


September 










1.230 


.130 


- 


.6199 


.4525 


.2674 


October, 










1.246 


.146 


- 


.6961 


.4350 


.2611 


November 










1.250 


.150 


- 


.7152 


.4137 


.3015 


December, 








1.270 


.170 


- 


.8105 


.4100 


.4005 



680 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn, etc. — Con. 
1904. 



Months. 


Proof 
Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January, .... 


$1.2700 


$0.1700 


- 


$0.8143 


$0.4275 


$0.3868 


February, 










1.2700 


.1700 


- 


.8143 


.4600 


.3543 


March, 










1.2800 


.1800 


- 


.8622 


.4900 


.3722 


April, 










1.2800 


.1800 


- 


.8622 


.4650 


.3972 


May, . 










1.2800 


.1800 


- - 


.8622 


.4725 


.3897 


June, 










1.2725 


.1725 


- 


.8262 


.4712 


.3550 


July, . 










1.2600 


.1600 


- 


.7664 


.4725 


.2939 


August, 










1.2500 


.1500 


- 


.7185 


.5125 


.2060 


September, 








1.2530 


.1530 


- 


.7328 


.5100 


.2228 


October, 








1.2500 


.1500 


- 


.7185 


.5000 


.2185 


November, 








1.2400 


.1400 


- 


.6706 


.5000 


.1706 


December, 








1.2400 


.1400 


- 


.6706 


.4350 


.2356 



1905. 



January 


$1,231 


$0,131 


- 


$0.6290 


$0.4200 


$0.2090 


February, 










1.225 


.125 


- 


.6005 


.4275 


.1730 


March, 










1.225 


.125 


- 


.6005 


.4550 


.1455 


April, 










1.225 


.125 


- 


.6005 


.4600 


.1405 


May, . 










1.233 


.133 


- 


.6385 


.4800 


.1585 


June, 










1.262 


.162 


- 


.7777 


.5175 


.2602 


July, . 










1.270 


.170 


- 


.8162 


.5375 


.2787 


August, 










1.272 


.172 


- 


.8257 


.5300 


.2957 


September, 








1.290 


.190 


- 


.9122 


.5125 


.3997 


October, . 








1.300 


.200 


- 


.9602 


.5000 


.4602 


November, 








1.300 


.200 


- 


.9602 


.4550 


.5052 


December, 








1.300 


.200 


- 


.9602 


.4200 


.5402 



1910.' 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



681 



Statistics of Spirits and Com, etc. — Con. 
1906. 



Months. 


Proof 
Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January, .... 


SI. 290 


$0,190 


- 


SO. 9140 


SO. 4100 


$0.5040 


February, 










1.285 


.185 


- 


.8900 


.3900 


.5000 


March, 










1.280 


.180 


- 


.8660 


.3900 


.4760 


April, 










1.280 


.180 


- 


.8660 


.4350 


.4310 


May, . 










1.287 


.187 


- 


.8996 


.4750 


.4246 


June, 










1.290 


.190 


- 


.9140 


.5000 


.4140 


July, . 










1.290 


.190 


- 


.9140 


.4950 


.4190 


August, 










1.290 


.190 


- 


.9140 


.4850 


.4290 


September 










1.290 


.190 


- 


.9140 


.4700 


.4440 


October, 










1.290 


.190 


- 


.9140 


.4475 


.4665 


November 










1.290 


.190 


- 


.9140 


.4400 


.4740 


December, 








1.290 


.190 


- 


.9140 


.4000 


.5140 



1907. 



January 


SI. 2900 


SO. 190 


- 


SO. 9200 


SO. 3975 


$0.5225 


February, 










1.2900 


.190 


- 


.9200 


.4300 


.4900 


March, 










1.2900 


.190 


- 


.9200 


.4300 


.4900 


April, 










1.2900 


.190 


- 


.9200 


.4425 


.4775 


May, . 










1.2950 


.195 


- 


.9442 


.4950 


.4492 


June, 










1.3100 


.210 


- 


1.0168 


.5175 


.4993 


July, . 










1.3100 


.210 


- 


1.0168 


.5200 


.4968 


August, 










1.3100 


.210 


- 


1.0168 


.5400 


.4768 


September 










1.3270 


.227 


- 


1.0991 


.6050 


.4941 


October, 










1.3420 


.242 


- 


1 . 1770 


.5575 


.6195 


November, 








1.3500 


.250 


- 


1.2150 


.5550 


.6600 


December, 








1.3500' 


.250 


- 


1.2150 


.5800 


.6350 



682 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Statistics of Spirits and Corn, etc. — Con. 
1908. 



Months. 


Proof 
Spirits 

per 
Gallon. 


Same 
less Tax. 


Same 
less Tax 

and 
Rebates. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
of Corn. 


Corn per 
Bushel. 


Spirits 
from One 

Bushel, 
less Price 
of Corn. 


January, .... 


$1,350 


$0,250 


- 


$1.2432 


$0.5700 


$0.6732 


February, 










1.350 


.250 


- 


1.2432 


.5650 


.6782 


March, 










1.350 


.250 




1.2432 


.5850 


.6582 


April, 










1.350 


.250 


- 


1.2432 


.6500 


.5932 


May* 










1.350 


.250 


- 


1.2432 


.6775 


.5657 


June, 










1.350 


.250 


- 


1.2432 


.6725 


.5707 


July, . 










1.350 


.250 


- 


1.2432 


.7050 


.5382 


August, 










1.362 


.262 


- 


1.3030 


.7750 


.5280 


September 










1.370 


.270 


- 


1.3450 


.7800 


.5650 


October, 










1.370 


.270 


- 


1.3450 


.6600 


.6850 


November, 








1.370 


.270 


- 


1.3450 


.6200 


.7250 


December, 






1.370 


.270 


- 


1.3450 


.5675 


.7775 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



683 























CO 




IO 








a> 


co 




<M 




00 


o 


•^< 


o 


o 


IO 


© 


© 


2 


c~- 


CD 


CO 


IO 


IO 


03 


CO 


r^ 


00 


© 


© 


OS 


t* 


























o 

o 


a 
© 


CO 

BC 


© 


a 


8 


CO 
X 


<N 


§ 


•J 


© 
IQ 


9 


190 


oa 


r- 


t~- 


r^ 


CO 


CO 


cc 


CO 


lf5 


"5 


CO 


t~ 




io 










f~ 








8 








»-i 


00 


cc 


CO 


e 


CM 


"5 


© 


3 


CO 


eo 


190 










3 


•^ 






CM 


<M 


S 




<M 


N 


N 




N 


•n 


EN 


N 


CM 






















TH 








to 


CO 


co 


55 






CM 


■**< 


_ 


L~ 








« 1 




















































•» 


























U5 










IO 


s 






s 






ia 




T>< 


CO 


CO 




CO 


CM 


o 


00 


CO 


o 
04 i 


CD 


OS 


93 


eo 


CO 


cc 


3 


IO 


IO 


03 


J5 


oo 




w» 


























© 


CO 


io 

CM 


X 


g 
















o 


co 


CO 


•* 


— 


CO 
















s 


e© 


























io 




>a 


oo 




CN! 


cr? 




CM 


IO 






m 


<— ' 






N 


o 






CO 










© 
en 


CM 


,_, 


_l 


_l 










r^ 


CC 


IO 




«• 






CN 


C-J 




















CO 


f^ 


"5 


«o 


CO 


§ 


N 


L-O 


IO 


00 


IO 


N 




c. 


CO 




t> 






l~- 


t"> 






2 


CO 


CO 


t^. 


OO 


















w» 








N 


















»« 










8 


s 










^^ 


,_J 


•1 


Tfl 


CO 




W 




i- 


X 


o 


CO 


I 


CO 


— 


CT 


'-S 


cr 


CT 


cr: 


2 


L~ 


IQ 


— 


CO 






§ 






§ 








[^ 








s 

en 


© 




r^ 








X 


_ 


•"** 


■tl 




•**< 




T*l 


_ 
















CM 
69 


CM 


^1 


CM 


N 


















r^ 


8 






















a 


00 


IO 


o 


N 


>o 


03 


t^ 


-* 




r~ 


OS 


s 




_H 


«# 




03 






_< 


CO 


•«*< 


■«f 


S! 




























w 


























f^ 








3 










CO 




s 


00 




O 


CO 


■<*< 


CO 


T3 


CO 


l~ 


CO 




i 


© 
69 


a 


£ 


o 


O 


© 


2 


a 


a 


o 


e 


o 


to 


























M 


























E- 


























2 


























C 


























s 




























Li 

a 
3 

a 

a] 

>-> 


3 


a 


Q. 
< 


- 


a 


"3 


I" 

bfi 

3 


u 

J} 
£ 
S 

a 

o 



o 

o 


E 
o 
> 
c 
2 


1 

E 

1 
Q 



684 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



fti 2 



5. 



Ob 7 

7 s 

Oo us 



> 


g 


eo 


o 
O 


.© 


3 






5 


gg 


O 

3 


T) 


o> 




>. 


g 






^ 









r 





eo 


co 




o 






o 












oo 






CN 




■DO 


CO 


us 


oo 


cr 


US 


o 


CO 


s 


■«*i 


"5 


US 


IO 


tH 


-* 


-* 


IO 


CO 


IO 


IO 


IO 




s» 


























CO 


"O 




o 


CO 


to 


o 


o 


o 




^ 


o 


t- 






-* 














"* 


us 




eo 


US 
«© 


US 


IO 


s 


co 


-# 


3 


3 


US 


CO 


US 


IO 




o 










eo 














to 




cc 


o 


us 


US 


'— | 


GO 


t^ 


t- 


1^ 


o 


>o 


So 


CO 


l>- 


f^ 


OJ 


C3 


e» 


00 


co 


a~. 


oa 


o 


r^ 


«© 


























o 


*o 


s 




o 






us 


© 


o 


co 


t^ 


US 






T* 


co 




l> 


t- 






I " H 




So 

1-1 


■>* 








CO 




o 


_ 


_- 


— 


Cft 


CO 


6© 












CN 


CO 




CO 






























CO 


s 




r- 


IO 


CD 


o 




o 






o 


US 


1-1 


CO 


US 


lO 


us 


co 


O0 


oo 


t>- 


t- 


co 


US 


US 




«© 




























eo 


















^ 




eo 


us 


o 


CO 


-CK 


CO 


t^ 


o 




CO 


o 






So 

T-l 


_, 


_H 






,_l 


,_! 


__ 












co 
e© 


CO 


eo 


CO 


eo 


eo 


eo 


CO 












8 


to 




















o 


a 


CO 


o 


CO 


-Ch 


OJ 


US 


CO 


CO 


US 


C5 




oo 








CM 












eo 




CM 


CO 

«© 


CO 




CM 


eo 


CO 




eo 


CO 


CO 


cq 


CM 




o 


§ 










o 




o 


o 


■co 


o 


TH 


CO 


CM 


CO 


»o 


CXI 


US 


CO 






1-1 




00 




















-jH 


S 


-* 


CO 

«© 


CM 


CO 


CM 


co 


CO 


CO 


CO 


03 








s 




t^ 


^ 






o 


us 


eo 


o 


t^ 


US 


S5 

oo 




co 


CO 


us 








•"- 1 








CO 




i 






o 


o 


o 


O 


oo 


t^ 


CO 


eo 

G© 


eo 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


■CO 


CO' 










CO 






g 


O 


eo 


P0 


t- 


o 


o 


§ 


o 




i-l 


00 




Ci 




r-t 


co 








ss 




t^ 


r^ 


r^ 






t- 


s 


C5 


eo 


-* 


US 


CO 

e© 


CO 


CO 


eo 


CM 


eo 


































O 


t^ 




CO 


CO 




». 


CO 


© 


O 


eo 


o 


CJ 




eo 


00 
00 








8 












OS 


oa 


00 


CO 

e© 


CO 


CM 


CO 


CO 


CO 


co 


co 


eo 
































W 


























H 


























£ 


























O 


























§ 


















•■ 










C 

1-5 


>. 














u 
co 
XI 

5 

ft 

CD 

QQ 


. 


- 
(1) 
J3 


CD 




ea 

s 




< 




a 


3 

1-9 


3 
< 


CD 

Q 



o 
O 


fa 
> 

o 
55 


c 

0) 

o 

a 

Q 



1910.' 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



685 






5 



e 

c 

^ 

*==; 
%> 

§> 





8 
















O 


"0 


CO 


o 


s 


a 


5 


o 


© 


o 


US 






CM 


,_l 


US 


01 












CO 


CO 


-r 


us 


CO 


t^ 


t. 


««■ 


cm 


CI 


CI 


CM 


CM 


CN 


CM 






























o 


o 


o 


oo 


o 


cr 


a 


o 


o 




O 


O 


o 








o> 








oo 












us 


us 


us 


<» 


oi 




(M 


CJ 


<M 


CJ 


CM 


CI 


CM 














c» 




<M 


§ 


US 


t^ 


o 


e 


o 


t- 




US 


o 


»-l 


CO 


CO 


CM 


CO 










os 


OS 


OS 


o 


O 


OS 


o 


OS 


OS 


00 


OO 


00 


cm 

w 


d 


CI 


CO 


CO 


<M 


CO 














us 


o 


o 


o 


o 


CO 


us 


o 


o 


o 


00 


o 


CO 


d 


us 


c- 




-f 


CO 


CI 












at 














t^ 


t>. 






00 


OS 


CM 


cm 


(M 


CI 






CI 


<N 


Ol 


CI 


CI 


CM 


















O 


o 


CM 


o 


o 


US 


t~ 


us 


O 


o 


us 


o 


O 














CM 










CM 


CI 


-f 


us 


US 


CO 


co 


CM 
W 


<M 


cm 


CI 


<M 


C) 


CM 


CM 


«N 


CM 
















_ 
















<# 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


US 




CM 


Ol 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


so 


CO 


CO 


o 


OS 


© 


_ 


<s© 


CI 




CI 


CI 


CM 


CI 
















t^ 






















OS 


CO 


GO 


co 


CI 


CO 


00 


CO 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o> 


OS 










3 


t^ 


f^ 


t^. 


t^. 








N 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CI 


CM 


C) 


CM 


CI 


CM 






^_ 






















CI 


US 


CO 


Ol 


us 




CO 




© 


US 


t> 


US 




0) 


t~ 


os 


_H 


,_l 




CI 


H 


,_, 












CI 


eo 


OO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CI 


CI 


CI 


CM 




us 




















o 


o 


y-t 


fr» 


co 


00 


o 


o 




© 


CI 


00 


t>. 




us 


OS 


OS 


o 


<M 








T*1 


-« 


Ml 


esc 


t^ 


t^ 


0» 


CI 


CM 


CM 


CI 


CI 


CM 


CM 


CI 


CI 


CI 


CM 




o 


t~ 


o 


o 


o 




s 


o 




o 






s 




00 






OS 


<M 


CI 


OS 


US 


OS 


t~- 


T*< 


Tj< 


CO 


<M 


0C 


^ 


_ 




CO 






Os 


CO 


CO 


CO 


co 


CI 


CM 


CM 














CM 


3 


o 


t~ 




o 


CI 


o 


t^ 




o 




o> 






CO 


CO 


t^ 




i-< 


-f 


CO 


t- 


us 


t^ 


CO 


c© 


OO 


•"5H 


in 


CO 


o 


CO 


us 




00 


eo 


CO 


•» 








CI 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 






00 


























a 


























& 


























z 


























c 


























S 




























3 

C 
S3 

Ha 


3 

fa 


o 

a3 


0. 
< 




e 

3 
»-s 




CO 

3 
bO 

3 


i 

8 

02 


- 
o 

o 


CO 

S 

► 

o 


CD 

s 
s 

Q 



686 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



oq 



2? 

1 

3 








e© 


eo 


IO 


CO 


CO 
















A 










»H 


o 


o 




OS 


t- 


oo 


CO 


en 


4© 


CO 


eo 


t-~ 


t- 


CO 


t^ 


r^ 


eo 


eo 


t* 


l> 


I . 


8 


O 


-* 




^ 


IO 


lr^ 


1^ 








s 


eo 


1 " H 


«~ 1 








«H 


t> 




eo 


*# 


s 


s 


o 


O 


o 


r-l 


■CO 


CO 


00 


OS 




































»o 


s 


«3 


^ 


OS 


IO 


MS 


>c 


r^ 








E'- 




7—1 










CO 




eo 


CO 


CO 


en 


CO 
G© 


eo 


O 


eo 


CO 


»o 


CO 


co 


CO 


CO 


t- 


oo 








CO 










s 




g 






to 


as 










-*l 




>st< 


© 


t- 


<Ti 


o» 


CO 


GO 


GO 


CO 


GO 


CO 


CO 


O0 


t» 


o 


iO 








s 


















cS 


US 


as 


o 




co 


CO 




GO 


o 


o 




i 




" 


t- 


*» 


t^ 


IO 


r-~ 


CO 


OS 


OS 


OO 


t^ 




OS 






CO 










I>i 


9 


3 




** 


o 


CO 


t- 








co 




CO 


»o 


§ 


OS 




CO 


CO 


C5 


o 


o 


o 


r- 


co 




-* 




































eo 
















eo 






!>. 


os 


co 




t-- 


co 


0- 


OS 


00 


eo 


en 


t>- 


CO 


GO 


GO 


o 


OS 


00 


oo 


OS 


o 


GO 


CO 


























n" 


§ 


-* 


88 




w 

■* 


CO 


IO 


5 


jo 


OS 


CO 

'CO 


CO 


o 
en 
1-1 


o 


C5 


CO 


60 


1H 


a 


o 


CT5 


1^ 


l> 


CO 


t^ 


6^ 


























8 


GO 
GO 


W 


3 


o 


CO 

co 


§ 


IO 


CO 


00 


s 


OS 


en 


to 


lO 


co 


t^ 


t^ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


OS 


o 


_- 


tH 






































CO 


io 


§ 


CO 


rH 


t> 


CO 


e 


CO 


o 


CM 


CO 


OS 








-* 






s 


as 

6© 


o 


GO 


t» 


t- 


t- 


M< 


N 


CO 


CO 


lO 


eo 
















r^ 








CO 


IO 


en 
en 




>* 


r~ 




iO 


io 


«* 


co 


en 




b- 






eo 








,-H 


CXI 


co 


<* 


-f 


,— 1 


oo 




«© 










































CO 


©■ 




CO 


eo 

00 


O 


O 


CO 


co 


IO 


CO 


OKI 


io 










IO 




-* 


>* 


-* 


<# 


■* 


IO 


IO 


IO 


T* 


tO 




























to 


























W 


























&i 


























fc 


























o 


























§ 




























1 4 


3 


I 
s 


'u 

ft 

< 




CP 




in 

bl) 

< 


£ 
3 
ft 

CO 


£ 
O 
« 
O 


CO 

s 

> 
o 


S 
I 

Q 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



687 



CQ 






s 

en 


8 


8 


8 


o 
a 


a 
a 


8 


a 
a 


8 


a 
o 


8 


s 


8 










00 




00 


CO 


90 


CO 


co 


oo 


CN 


CN 


CI 


CJ 


<N 


CN 


C-J 












00 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


a 
a 


o 
e 


o 
a 


8 


en 




















co 


OO 




cm 


ti 


CJ 


CJ 


Cl 


CJ 


CM 


CI 


C-J 


CM 


C-l 


CM 




S 


8 


8 


8 


8 


o 
o 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


o 
en 


00 


00 


a 


00 

CI 


30 


8 


OO 
CM 


S 


00 
CM 


oo 


co 

CM 


00 
CM 




s 


o 
o 


o 

o 


8 


8 


8 


a 
o 


8 


8 


8 


a 

o 


a 
a 


o 


























»H 


CN 
6© 


cn 


CI 


CM 


CI 


CJ 


CN 


CM 


C-l 


CI 


CI 


CM 








8 
















8 






o 


3 


— 


o 


a 


a 


a 


o 


a 


a 


e 




















oo 


































•» 


























8 


8 


3 

s 


a 
a 


8 


a 
a 


a 
a 


o 
o 


a 
a 


a 
o 


a 
a 


8 


o 


00 






00 


CO 
















i-i 


«f» 


e* 


C-] 


N 


cq 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CI 


(C-l 


CM 






8 


8 






8 


















o 


— 


o 


o 


O 


a 


a 


a 


o 


o 


00 


oo 


oo 




OO 










co 






" , 


<* 




CN 


CM 








CM 


CM 


CN 


C! 


CM 




8 


8 


8 


a 

a 


8 


a 
a 


8 


a 
a 


a 
a 


o 
a 


s 


8 


| 


00 

CN 
6& 


DO 
cj 


00 
CM 


8 


00 
C4 


oo 

CM 


oo 


oo 

CI 


oo 

CM 


co 

(CI 


oo 


a 




o 

o 


8 


a 
o 


§ 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


a 

o 


a 

a 


8 


e 


CO 
























** 


CM 


n 


CM 




CM 


CM 


Cl 


CI 






CM 






o 

U5 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


us 

CI 


8 


8 


8 


o 


























*" 


CO 


eo 




CO 


CO 


CO 




CO 


CO 


CM 


CJ 


CM 












8 


8 


8 














o 


o 


a 


a 


o 


a 


a 


a 


a 


en 








CO 


















iH 


* 




cm 


CM 


CI 


CM 


CM 


CO 


CO 


eo 


CO 


CO 












8 


















o 


o 


5 


cr 




a 


a 


3 


a 


a 


a 


2 












' 














CM 


CI 


CI 














































H 


























H 


























Z 


























O 


























s 




























i 

- 






"C 
- 


£ 


© 

a 

3 

»-9 


- 


r. 

3 

3 


£ 


is 

- 

s 


3 
E 

I 


3 

Xi 

I 




(2 


s 


< 


«= 


<; 


o 


fc 


Q 



688 



COST OF LIVING, 



[May, 



1 

CO 

s 

1 





CO 


<N 




CI 


CD 




25 


r^ 




t» 






s 

«D 










1-1 




OS 


© 


"* 






o 


>-H 


i-H 


CM 


eg 


iH 


^H 


O 


OS 


CO 


CO 


OO 




i& 


























© 


O 


tH 




r^ 




r^ 


(<■ 










oo 




»""l 


>-i 








'-i 


t~~ 








CD 


§ 


OS 




o 




,_i 


,_| 


,— 1 


,_l 


eg 




_ 
































id 


LO 


us 


Iffl 


OS 


co 


US 


o 


o 


s 




sg 






1—1 


"-< 








** 


«-l 




co 


«© 


o 


"5 


"* 


CO 


co 


, 


LO 


o 


CD 


t~ 


00 




§ 


















s 






to 


CD 


t^ 




OS 


t^ 


K5 


o 






eg 


o 


OS 


© 


OS 


OS 


© 


OS 


CT> 


OS 


CO 


t>. 


iQ 


"* 




»o 


O 


lO 


lO 


<* 


LO 




s 




CD 






US 


'- 1 










CO 




o 


-cK 




CO 


o> 


«& 












CO 


C] 


eg 




o 


OS 




OS 


"* 




C] 






s 
















CO 












CO 


OS 




CO 


s 


as 


-* 


ec 


CO 


<tf 


>o 


»o 


US 


LO 


3 


co 










U3 










2 






C! 






00 


>o 


'— i 


t>- 


OS 


O} 


>H 


fr- 


OS 


00 


CO 


§ 


«5 


co 


CD 


co 


t^ 


CO 


OS 


OS 




,_t 


CI 


CO 
































s 
















CI 


lO 




co 


o 


eg 


CI 


«# 




CO 


Cl 


C5 


CO 




§ 


,_, 


,_, 




© 


!>. 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CD 


CO 


e© 


















































,_J 


00 


lO 


CD 


b- 




o 


o 


CJ 


OJ 


*-4 


© 




IS 


<M 


rH 






_H 


CI 


eg 


CI 


e< 


CI 


eg 


,-1 




























e© 














































C3 






CD 


CI 


CI 


M 


o 


CI 


C^ 


•<* 


co 


OS 


o 


lO 


o 


O0 

«© 


O 


O 


O 


"* 


US 


00 


OS 


CD 


CI 


eg 


2 












§ 








t^ 


CI 


eg 




00 






-*J4 


OS 




CO 


eg 










t^ 








00 


t^. 


t^ 


CO 


CO 


oo 


o 


o 






























§ 












LO 


CI 






eg 






CO 


o 


I- 
















en 
oo 


o 


OS 


oa 


00 


00 




t~ 


t^ 


t» 


r^ 


t^ 


» 




«© 


















































W 


























^ 


























£ 


























O 


























§ 




























1 A 


i 

3 


o 






^s 


1-3 


to 

M 

<1 


as 

£ 
a 

0) 


C 
O 

O 


w 

a 

> 



2 


s 

o 

0> 

Q 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



689 



G 



rf2 

2 






C3i 
| 









oo 


00 


CO 


00 


o 


N 


t^ 








o> 




CM 








•«J< 




t~- 


o 




a> 


CM 


1 






CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


eM 


•»»< 


co 


t^ 


00 




£ 














CO 


co 


CO 


eo 


CO 




■<*< 


J* 


■^ 


■<f 


3 


00 


o 

CM 


O 
CM 


8 


8 


8 


o 

CM 




























s 


— 








CO 


CO 






eo 


eo 


eo 






O 


8 


o 


8 


CM 




it< 












OS 


o> 








■^< 


■^ 








O 


























■*»« 
«• 










•^ 








■«*< 




Tj< 




g 


§ 


8 


8 


8 


o 
os 


o 


o 
a> 


a 


8 


§ 


o 

OS 


I g 


o 




§ 


o 


























>r 


— 


Tji 




•*fi 


^ 


•«»< 






o 


us 


US 


US 




■a 


CO 














1—1 


fc» 




t— 


t-» 


i^ 


•*»< 


'-' 




OS 


OS 


en 

i-l 


co 


t^. 


00 


00 


oo 


00 


00 


OS 


N 


,h 






» 


CO 


CO 




CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 




■^ 










US 


US 


"5 


us 


IQ 


us 


US 


^ 






t^ 






f- 


t- 






t~" 


t>- 


t"" 


*■* 


CM 


N 


<— 1 


2 


00 


00 


00 


00 


>0 


X 


00 


00 


us 


**< 






eo 


ro 


CO 


CO 


DC 






eo 




CO 


CO 


eo 








8 




















M 


00 




es 








f~ 


t^ 






t^ 


' 2 

| s 






— - 


00 


00 


00 


3C 


y. 


00 


00 


00 




CO 


CO 


eo 


CO 


CO 


eo 


re 






CO 


CO 


eo 






8 


■<*< 


— 


X 


r>- 


<M 


s 


Tf< 


-1 










*# 














X 




§ 






rt 


CM 


•*)< 


r-» 






t>- 


CO 




-# 


M 


CO 


■^ 


•»*< 






US 






■*fl 


•** 


■"f 




ED 

OS 


US 


~ 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


8 


o 


o 

CM 


o 

CM 


I 


03 


CD 


t» 


c; 


o 


as 




OS 


OS 








eo 


CO 


CO 










CO 




eo 


CO 


CO 






























t^. 






t>- 


!~ 


t- 


OS 


CO 


s» 


o> 


oa 


OS 


CO 


eo 


eo 


eo 


eo 


Os 


US 


CM 


to 




CO 


CO 


us 


■c 












^ 




eo 


CO 


CO 






























CO 


X 




t*- 


IQ 




US 


M 






t» 


r^ 


» 


^H 


^H 


Tt< 












eo 






eo 


w 


CO 


eo 


CO 


eo 










us 


IC 


us 
























■* 




oo' 


















CO 


-. 


ci 


CM 


00 
















_l 








CM 


CM 


CM 


-i 


C( 


N 


-i 


CO 




eo 


eo 


CO 






' m 






















a 


























I 


























o 


























a 




























>i 


6 














jo 
£ 

- 
a) 

X 




0) 






a 

S3 

»-9 


3 


1 


<5 


s) 


® 

a 

3 


3 

!-S 


•A 

3 
M 

3 


| 

o 
O 


b 
o 
> 
o 


s 

5 

Q 



690 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



-5£ 






Oh 















i_- 


CO 






CO 












■* 






-tf 


"* 


l-~ 


CO 


-_; 






1 


e© 
































w 




















00 


oo 


X 


00 


0C 


t~ 


o. 


t- 


t> 








§ 
















































































QO 


00 


00 


00 


oo 


00 


00 


00 


cc 


zo 


30 


oo 


s 


























! " 


























i . 






















§§ 


§3 




00 


X 


=c 


00 


oo 


00 


ZC 


CO 


00 


zr. 


§ 




















































! , 




co 


eo 




m 


m 


m 


CO 


00 




cc 






CD 


CO 


t> 


rs 


t- 


t- 


t- 


t- 


OO 


00 


cc 


OO 




























a 


s© 


































eo 


















!>. 








r- 


t^ 


t- 


t- 


«5 


us 


u- 


us 


§ 


























tH 




























00 


as 


>a 




eo 


eo 




eo 


eo 


eo 










tr- 


t- 


o 


«^ 


r- 


l> 


t~ 


t>- 


r- 


l> 


»• 


! S 


^ 




































. 


t- 












! " 






jC 


as 


oa 


— 


co 


eo 




C 


O 


OS 














CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


,_, 






























as 


ee 


CO 


«5 


OS 


as 


"-- 


as 


as 


>fl 


as 


as 




CD 






t> 






t— 


[~~ 




t- 




t^- 






























«© 




























— 


o 


O 


o 


ci 


in 


a 


as 


us 


us 




s 


** 


•**< 




<# 


■**< 


CO 












co 


CO 


CO 


CO 


co 


CO 


CO 


CO 










































(M 


»fl 






CO 




zzzz 


o 


cr 




o 


©» 




■<** 


»o 


CO 


CO 


00 




CO 


tj< 


^r 


-i- 


*# 


00 


€© 












CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 




O 


c 


o 


o 


a 


o 


— 


^ 


— 


CI 


as 


as 




CO 


CO 


eo 


eo 




CO 






T 


































00 


«& 
























1 

1 

GO 


























n 


























E-> 


























|z; 


























o 


























§ 




























s 


£ 














— 


1 


CO 


CO 




2 


J3 
o 

S 


EL 




eo 

= 
- 


3 


3 
bO 

< 


ft 

co 
GO 


01 

_:■ 
o 
a 

O 


O 

2 


B 
8 

CO 
P 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



691 



! 
5 





















t^ 












<M 






O 


•>* 


Ol 


m 


O 


OS 


oo 


t~ 


■<*< 


Tt* 


OS 


OS 


OS 


cs 


C5 


o 


_ 1 


O 


_| 


,H 


«• 




































CN 






O 






















CN 


CN 


Ol 


Ol 




<M 


CO 


M 


M 


co 


CO 


Tt< 


rj< 


■<*< 


~+< 


<* 


~f 


Tj< 




ft» 


























o 


O 


O 


00 


o 


o 


Tt< 


OS 


^ 








t~ 




•^ 










~r 


*-* 






>* 


Tj< 


5 


•» 






o 


o 






CN 


O] 


CO 


OO 


CO 


i 


US 


© 


O 


o 


o 


t- 


m 


O 


O 


O 


Ol 


o 


i 




•^ 


Ol 


OS 


uO 






'— ' 


OS 


OS 




■* 


■* 


-f 


«* 


CO 


>* 


«# 


co 


oo 


CN 


CN 


Ol 


-H 




•» 


























CO 




IQ 




IQ 




US 












u> 


l» 




t^ 


t^ 


CM 


r~ 


r- 


■<»< 


' _l 


Ol 


OS 


OS 


« 


CO 


CO 


3 


s 


IQ 


03 


o 


US 


t^ 


S3 


^ 


"* 




























1 •** 




r^ 


t^ 


r- 


















i °> 




io 


ia 


ta 


>a 


to 


»o 


uO 


iej 


2! 


2! 


CO 


. 


t-- 






CN 


O0 














»o 


2 


CM 


CO 


o 




CO 


CO 




r- 


t^ 


t^ 


c^ 


!>• 


§ 


o 


OS 


oo 


00 


oo 


OS 












US 


- 


•» 
































CO 


















1 e* 


t~ 


00 




o 


co 
















o» 

i 


a» 


OS 


o 


= 


Ol 


■* 


os 


oo 


t^ 


t-~ 


CO 


US 


1 








o 


O 


CM 


o 


o 


CM 


O 


O 






CM 


CM 


CO 


Ol 


CN 


■co 


O] 




CO 


US 


CM 


t~ 


; § 


69 


CO 


~* 


lO 


o 


>* 


IQ 


lO 


-* 


CN 


Ol 


= 




























1 


cm 


00 




l> 


CO 




















o 


_l 


■«*l 


CM 














t¥» 




CM 


oi 


CN 


N 


CM 


Ol 


CN 


CM 












CM 


t^ 


CO 


f~ 


t>- 


00 


OS 




CO 




os 


t^ 


X 


-*■ 


CO. 


t- 


O 


•>* 


oo 


CO 




CM 






■* 


CO 


o 


H 


oa 


O 


co 


CO 


IO 


O 


o. 


o 


* H 


•» 


























OS 


03 


t^ 


CC 


^ 
















00 


1—1 
























00 




-£ 


CO 


-f 


~ 


?H 


2! 


2! 


lO 


U5 


W 


Tt< 




























w 


























H 


























2 


























o 


























s 




























>> 


>. 














J2 




CD 


C9 

X2 




el 
3 
d 

1 


fa 


« 


ft 
< 


at 


a 




3 
if. 
3 
< 


33 
ft 
CO 


CC 


o 

o 


CD 
O 


B 
S 

CD 

Q 



692 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



f 

! 

I 

St! 



»h g 



so 


m 


S 


u 


© 




« 

£ 


3 


© 




a 


o 


o> 


-*? 


■5? 


o 


-S£ 


Eh 



"^ 00 





CM 


IQ 


CO 




_ 


LO 




CO 


CN 


CO 


CO 


t^ 






«# 


■>* 


CO 




CO 


co 




co 


CO 




CM 




























00 


.©# 


























OS 




o 






^ 




CO 








OS 




CO 


CO 


TJH 


>* 


co 


co 


CM 


CM 


*# 


«# 




CO 




























oo 


e& 


























lO 


o 


o 


CO 


K3 


»o 




>-o 




US 


C5 


_ 


«o 






-* 


^M 


us 


ia 


lO 


LO 


as 


IO 




»o 


00 


CM 


CM 


CM 


«M 


CM 


CM 


CO 


CM 


CM 


CN 


CM 


- 
















H 














O 






r^ 




t^ 














IA 




os 


OS 


oo 


os 


CM 


^ 


o 


CM 


CN 


CN 


CM 


oo 


s 










" 


" 


cn 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 




o 


os 


os 










t>» 


C5 


OS 


CM 




*** 


1—1 






OJ 


o 


•-I 




o 


OS 


OJ 


OS 


00 


oo 

tH 


e© 














" 












t^. 


ess 


a 


lO 


_ 


C5 


»o 




LO 


o 


OO 


CM 






CO 






lO 


CO 


CO 






CO 
































00 


e» 


























t^ 








o 




f^ 




t^ 




l> 








i> 


t>- 


CO 


CO 


U3 


iQ 


QO 


l« 


IO 


<* 


T*« 




























oo 


&% 


























CM 








§ 










CM 






tH 


'"" , 






o 


OS 


o 


OS 


CO 


00 


b- 


CO 


s 


CN 


<N 


CM 


CM 


eN 




CM 


















S 


^ 




_■* 




s 


•tf 




^ 


» 




£ 


U3 


CO 




cm 
















e 




t» 




CN 


CN 


CO 


<* 


co 


CM 


CM 




00 


CM 


cn 


CM 


CM 


CN 


CM 


CM 


c-q 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 








\£ 






















OS 


o 


b- 


uO 


cm 


iO 


o 






iO 


o 


o 


©> 




co 


CM 




-* 


CM 




CM 




co 






oo 


CM 


CM 


CN 


cm 


N 


CN 


CM 


GN 


CM 


CN 


CO 


CO 










» 




-co 






















£ 




















CO 


to 


«s 




>o 






LO 


iq 


US 


ta 


00 
00 


e& 


cm 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CN 


6N 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


W 


























H 


























fc 


























O 


























3 


















u 






CO 

s 

CD 

o 

CO 

Q 




13 

a 

cS 
1-5 


3 


o 

1 


ft 


OS 

S 


a 

3 
i-s 




<n 

~ 
M 
3 
<5 


o 

a 

o 

a 

CO 

3Q 


U 

<D 

Si 

o 
o 



CO 



CO 

> 
o 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



693 



© 
53 





«c 


U3 




t» 


"5 




<M 


s 


© 














OS 




so 


t^ 


t^ 








00 




























SI 


w 


































uo 


t^ 














oo 














© 


© 


© 


© 


© 


© 


§ 


<M 


CN 


cm 


<M 


CM 
















»-l 


























t^ 


s 


g 


s 


o 
o 


O 
9 


© 

© 


© 
O 


© 

O 


© 


© 


U3 

© 


s 




CM 


CM 


CN 


<M 


CM 


<m 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CN 


CN 


CN 


iH 








































s 












© 


CO 


oo 


OO 


CO 


oc 


co 


oo 


CO 




■co 


© 


*H 


&% 






























o 






















t» 


CO 


CO 


oo 


oo 


t^ 


t^ 




l> 


co 


■CO 


OO 


3 














































































s 


00 


© 


OS 


OS 


OS 


OS 


CO 


•> 


eo 


eo 


© 


t- 


«¥» 




































© 


o 








r^. 






00 


© 


O 


o 


o 


© 


© 


© 


© 


O 


© 


00 




«o 




CM 


Ol 


cs 


CN 


CM 


CM 


CN 


Ol 


































OS 


o 


e 


© 


o 


© 


o 


© 


© 


co 


co 


O0 


0) 


ee 


N 


cm 


CNI 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 










CM 


O 


o 


s 


o 


© 


o 


© 


© 


■co 


t« 


© 


«H 




CO 


CO 




CO 


CO 




co 


CO 


CM 


*-> 




e 
en 




CM 


CN 


cn 


cn 


CN 


CM 


cj 


Ol 


CM 


CM 


" 












o 




O 












g 

01 


CM 


CM 


Ol 


OS 


CN 


Ol 


CNI 


Ol 


Ol 


Ol 


Ol 






co 


CO 


eN 


cq 


<M 


cn 


CM 


CM 


<M 


CN 


cm 




CO 


t^ 


■*< 


lfl 


o 


© 


Ol 


© 


© 








o 


■* 




9S 




1—1 


CO 


«# 


lO 


t— 


co. 


OS 


OS 


00 


g» 


™ 


" 


CM 


CI 


CI 


CN 


<M 


CM 


CM 


CN 


CM 


0D 


























X 


























H 


























z 


























o 


























S 




























>, 


>. 


















U 
CO 
Si 


4> 




p 

c* 


3 


ce- 
re' 




>, 

3 


6 

a 


>-> 


2 

M 
9 
<! 


= 

ft 

<c 

CO 


O 
© 

O 


CD 

> 




S 

CD 

CD 





694 



COST OF LIVING, 



[May, 



cq 











s 


g 






eo 






^ 






r~ 




r-- 






■o 




eo 




>o 


en 
eo 


8 




























t- 










S 


"* 


CO 




CO 




t> 


t^ 




t- 


l> 








l> 




lr~ 


t~ 














































































£ 


s 


co 


s 


C5 


00 

eo 


o 


f- 


CO 


eo 


§ 


9 


e 


00 


^ 


























o 


3 


00 
CO 


oo 


«o 

CO 


>* 


eo 


IS 


oc 


s 


3 


»o 


oo 


8 






































■* 


^ 


CO 


00 


CO 


00 




cc 


CO 


1* 






CO 


CO 












§ 


o 
































s 








CO 




O 




00 






Tfl 


LO 


LO 




"* 












00 


8 
































s 








s 


N 


IO 


CO 


eo 




l« 


CO 


t- 


eo 


-# 


lO 




«* 


oo 




s 


8 




























S 












N 


■* 




^* 


s 




OS 


OS 


OS 


00 


Vj 






r> 






en 
oo 


8 






























eo 


CO 




rmt 


CO 


eo 


•* 


§ 


o 


CO 




CO 


CN 


CO 


















g 


«© 


" 


" 


" 




























CO 


CO 


«* 


00 


■* 


IQ 


os 


<M 


o» 


OS 


O 


o 


CO 






o 






1-1 




** 


00 


8 


" 


" 


" 






" 






















5 








eo 


IQ 


CO 


OS 




CO 


cq 


CO 




CO 


CM 


CO 




































00 


ee 


















































X 


























% 


























o 


























£ 




























4 


B 


1 




i 

3 


a 
- 




i 

fcfl 


£ 

9 
P, 

a 
GQ 


S3 

| 
o 
O 


o 

s 

E 

o 


t-T 

0) 

a 
s 

Q 



1910. 



HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 



695 



s 

















r>- 










- i 




00 


00 


<35 


00 


CO 


CO 




l> 






us 


CO 


I 


8 




































71 






2S 






3 




CO 


X 


00 


x 














o» 


9» 
































CO 


us 


s 


.~ 










§ 








t^ 




CO 


CO 


»«. 


^ 


oo 


at 


at 


8 


























§ 


^ 


CO 


«5 




CO 






















CO 


CO 




ifl 


-,: 


CO 


us 


CO 


© 


o 




























us 


CI 








<N 


._ 












t>. 


t» 


t^ 


t^ 


l> 




f^ 




■c 


CO 


co 


CO 


O 

en 


© 


























l~» 






00 






















bo 






oo 


X 


00 


CO 


t^ 






t* 


i 


o 
























oo 






CO 


CO 


CO 


«2 


l> 


g 


DC 


s 


C 
— • 


S 


e» 


s 


































CM 




t» 












1 




r» 


CO 








CO 


t» 


r~ 


Id 


u~ 




s 
































m 


nn 


















cc 




!M 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 




o 


OS 


t^ 


•^ 


























- 


6% 
























r-l 






























s 




CM 






^ 




m 


r^ 


CO 






CO 


t^ 


US 


-. 




CM 


C3 


■»f 


■^i 


rc 


ec 




•» 






















" 




oa 




r^ 


a 














.. 




a 


CD 


t^ 




C5 


OS 


ex 




OS 






cc 


Tf 


CO 


o 






















" 


























' 


























• 
• 


aj 














































































& 


























z 





















































a 




























if- 


i 


. 






o 


>. 


OS 

a 


E 
5 


Z 
"c 


5 

a 
r 




g 




e8 

•-s 


s 


§ 


< 


a 


•-B 


3 

•-3 


a 
< 


-/. 


- 



o 
2 


o 



696 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



fe 



o 

•2 

-si 







o 


o 


o 


O 




















§ 






00 


» 




iO 


IO 


cc 


co 


CO 


CO 


CO 




^ 




























o 


o 


— 


o 




















s 








OS 


Oa 


oo 


00 


oo 


00 


00 


00 


00 




























a 




«© 
























o 




























2 






























W 


»o 


ie 


>--: 


W5 
















a 
o 


g 










X 


00 


X 


oo 


CS 


OS 


=-. 


Oi 




«© 
























U 


1 






















































o 










































= 














QQ 


1 






t~ 


r^ 


t^ 






CO 


CO 


t^ 


t^ 


00 


m 


















































































c3 






















































OQ 






























IO 


SO 


IO 


US 


















-d 


e 










SO 


CO 


CO 


L-? 


CO 


CO 


CO 


O 


a> 


























a 




























P 






















































a 




<o 


iO 


r^ 


— 


o 


o 


o 














*"; 


**: 


r-- 


X 


00 


00 


O0 


CO 






io 


IO 
































»H 


^ 




















































a 




























s 
























































o 




o 


DO 


= 


s 


o 


o 














U 


S5 






OS 




oa 


oa 


03 


OS 


Oa 


oa 


00 


tl 




^? 




















































-Q 














































































































N 


l 


8 


B 


2 


8 


o 


5-: 


— 
o 


o 

o 


s 








^ 


CM 


CM 


CN 


<M 


CM 


N 


eq 


CM 


CM 


^H 


*-< 


^ 


£ 


























a 

o 








cS 


3 


o 


§ 














s 




CM 


= 


o 


=: 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


n_ 


CM 


CM 


CM 


eq 


CM 


CM 






CM 










1-1 


























O 
























































O 




























































O 


O 






















IO 

>o 


§ 








CM 


cm 


CM 






CM 








" H 


6© 
























a 






-* 




^ 






X 




£ 






^ 






























i— i 


s 


CM 






c- 


oa 




eo 


»a 




oa 


OS 


00 














CM 




CM 


CM 




CM 




o 


1-1 


©& 
























> 




























o" 




00 


00 


o 


30 


»o 


iO 












































So- 


























C 




©& 
























o 




























co 












\N 












^ 


























c 




t^ 


fa 


ft 


CM 
























O 


00 


























*"' 


©& 
























U 

3 


1 


























1 










CM 






IO 


o 


t~ 






£ 


s 


CM 


C5 


CM 


CM 


eo 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


"- 1 




CM 






























3 




S5 
























TJ 




























rt 






































































































iO 




00 


CM 


x 


en 














. 


. 


t> 


t> 




CO 
























































o 














































































































o 




























a 
























































s- 




























a 




























o 
























































**- ' 




























C5 




























us 


£ 


























00 


O 


















(-" 




tT 


u 






c 

cS 
1-5 


>> 














£i 




-Q 






CS 

3 


a 

83 


a 
< 




= 


•-5 


3 
bf 


a 

o 
X 


CJ 
O 

o 
O 


cv> 
> 
o 


s 

8 

Q 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



697 



"»«> 


Q 


-s? 




f 


8 


s 


7. 


*w 


m 


<» 


$ 




0Q 


s 


T3 


tr 


g 



o> 


- 


C*i 


s 




o 


OO 


■g 




.0 






l»o 


•-9 


•^ 




S3 


£ 


■w 


R 


o 


g 












S 


•js 


a 


1 


OS 


» 








CI 


iO 


e> 


ft 






^c 



S3 



- 



4S ~ 

© 5 



j 




US 




















§ 


00 




t~ 


t^ 


CO 


SO 




I- 


CO 


CO 


^ 


t~ 


























I s 


«» 


























CO 


CO 


o 


o 


O0 


Tf< 


o 


s 










e- 
















!>. 




co 


i^ 


























TH 


69 


































s 




I--. 














Oi 


X 


W 


— 


OS 


00 


00 


X 




r» 


00 




























tH 


M 


























O 






CO 




OS 


8 








o 






00 












-f 


t~ 


t~ 


kO 


o 


s 


w 












CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 














t^- 




CO 


8 








3? 

00 


o 


o 






o 


O 




o 


— 


OS 


00 




CM 


^5 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 














CM 






»o 


iO 


>o 




CO 








CO 


-t 


«* 


Tj< 




"*■ 


Tf 


-r 


-** 


CM 






00 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


" 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 
















CM 


•M 


§ 


CM 




CM 




o 




"-C 


CO 


33 


Vi 




CO 


IO 


"* 


•"*! 


s 


CO 


CN 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 




»o 








— 


s 


a 


iffl 


US 


If! 


l« 


lO 


«H 






■<* 


IO 
















00 


eo 


eo 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


eo 


CO 


eo 


CO 


eo 


eo 












^ 




_•• 








- 






















CM 








i 


O 


o 


99 




1-1 


N 


eq 




CO 


CM 


1—1 


o 




•** 


CO 




CO 


CO 


eo 




eo 


eo 


eo 


CO 








a 




















CT> 


«5 


03 


CO 

us 


% 


a 

lO 








£ 


S 




o 

OS 


00 




CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 








CO 


eo 


eo 


CO 




i\ 


£ 














































S 


s 

00 


OS 


OS 


CS 


a 


a 


o 


— 


30 


— 


SO 


--= 


CO 


CO 


eo 


* 


-* 


■>* 


m< 


eo 


eo 


eo 


eo 


CO 


t» 


























X 


























H 


























z 


























o 


























s 






























jsj 














CO 

.a 


£ 


CO 
Si 
g 

> 

o 


CO 




3 

1-5 




5 


< 


S 


!-5 


3 

•-a 




c 

CD 
ft 

o 
X 


o 

O 


£ 
CD 
O 
CO 

Q 



698 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Cb 



to 

s 





o 


O 


o 


o 


uj 


o 


CO 


o 


o 


o 


o 


CO 


o» 


•"** 


-* 


"# 


-* 








>H 


»H 


■H 


<-l 


*-* 


§ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


" 


CO 


CO 


C-1 


CI 


CO 


CO 


eo 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


CO 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


oo 












•"*< 


*JH 


*# 


<* 


"* 




-* 


O) 


CO 


CN 


Cxi 


CO 


co 


CO 


CO 


CI 


CO 


CI 


C3 


eo 




US 


us 


US 


»Q 


us 


US 




us 


o 


o 


o 


o 


t» 




»# 


■<* 


>* 


■* 






*# 


US 


us 


to 


US 


OS 

1-1 


eo 


C5 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 




OS 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 




t^ 








CD 




CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CI 


CN 


CO 


CO 




o> 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 












US 












£ 




US 




CO 


CM 


eo 


Oil 


CO 


CO 






CO 


CO 




CO 


CO 


CN 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 




T* 


US 


os 


o 


o 


o 


o 


oo 




LO 


o 


us 


»# 


•<* 


■* 


"* 


us 


us 


US 


US 


CO 






1—1 


y ~ l 


| 


eo 

6© 


eq 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


c? 


CO 








o 










o 










eo 


"5 


US 


eo 


eo 


eo 


SO 


eo 


CO 


eo 


EO 


eo 


US 


en 

1-H 


eo 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CI 


co 


CO 


CO 




o 


o 




o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


us 






t>» 


os 


OS 


OJ 


OS 


OS 


ess 


OS 


C5 


CJS 


■"* 






| 


eo 
e© 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


C} 


CO 


CO 


CO 
























o 




1H 


00 


OS 


O 


OS 


C5 


C i 


C5 


OS 


OS 


OS 


OS 


OS 


OS 


CO 

e© 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


C} 


CO 


eo 






o 


© 




o 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


© 


00 


CO 


00 


us 


00 


oo 


oo 


oo 




co 














CO 


CO 


eo 


CO 


CO 


CO 


C3 


CO 




s© 
























tH 






































"\ 


-\ 




\^ 






^ 




00 


N 


CO 


o 


o 


§ 


CI 


© 


eo 


US 


US 




A 


00 




TfH 








1-1 


CO 








oo 


£ 


CO 


CI 


CO 


C3 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


a3 


























K 


























B 


























o 


























§ 




























S3 

d 

1-5 


(4 














u 
o 

a 

o 
ft 

a> 
03 






o 




S3 
0) 


si 

o 


ft 

< 


>> 

03 

% 


G 

I-* 


"5 

1-5 


3 
bo 

< 


o 

£i 

o 

o 


> 

o 


a 

8 
Q 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



699 



■I 



i -, 



o 
S 

a; 

o 



o 




























os 


s 


§ 


8 


o 

CM 


o 


a 


p 
a 


a 


s 


cr 
55 


8 


8 


g 


: 


en 

00 


eo 


-r< 


-f 


■»* 


«* 


■d 


»c 


LO 


ed 


>- 


00 


CO 


m 




•» 
























_o 




















































































.2 
























































"eS 


t^ 


s 


s 


O 
ci 


o 

C) 


a 

CM 


a 

o 


a 

00 


a 

CO' 


a 

CO 


a 

CO 


g 


g 


go 


s 


CO 


ed 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


CO 


eo 


eo 


CO 


$ 




M> 
























© 






























O 


a 


a 


o 


a 


cr 


a 


a 


p 


a 


a 


8 


■ 


(0 


CM 


Cl 










■>* 


CM 


a 


00 


o 


d 


s 


CO 


BO 


B0 


CO 


BO 


eo 


CO 


co 


CO 


CM 


2 


CO 


'"" 




«• 
























s 




























a 




























o 


us 


g 


g . 


O 

oo 


a 
a 


s 


a 

CM 
















s 


eo 


eo 


eo 


■»* 


■^ 


-# 


T»< 


Tt< 


■* 


Tt< 


~f 


CO 


co 


»H 


o» 
























S 




























00 




























d 


*i 


s 


o 


s 


a 


a 
oo 


a 


a 
a 


S 


8 


a 


a 


a 

CO 


hH 


en 

00 


a 


2 


OS 


os 


OS 


CJ5 


OS 


00 


l>i 


W5 


^ 


CO 




CM 




























«» 


















































-r ^ 




























§ 1 


CO 


O 

CO 
























2 £ 


8 


a 


o 


^ 


^ 


a 


OS 


oo 


OS 


oi 


a 


a 


a 






CM 


est 


CM 


cm 


c>i 










CJ 


CM 


CM 


| j 




•» 




















































S "o 
























































's * 




o 


o 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


8 


g 


C4 


CO 


co 


so 


Cl 


a 


CM 


Oi 


>* 


CO 


<* 


§° 


en 

00 


OS 


oi 


os 


a 


_; 


Cl 


^ - 


^ 


a 


^; 


^ 


s 








esi 


Cl 


N 


CM 


N 


C-5 


N 


Cl 


o ts 




«& 
























- 2 




























3 & 




























1 2 


*H 


g 


8 


o 

o 


a 
a 


s 


a 








a 




CO 


Jj 


en 

00 


s 


si 


s 


s 


8 


s 


S 


s 


s 


a 

CM 


oi 


OS 


a ■•* 




«» 




















































1-1 "cS 
© . 






















































5s; 

^S e3 


o 


s 


g 


o 


8 


g 


- 


a 
o 


8 


a 

00 




a 

co 


a 

CO 


s 


a 


a 


=5 


a 


CD 


H 


_' 


esi 


esi 


evi 


_; 


a 


° a 


CM 
6% 


CN 


CM 


Cl 


N 


CM 


<M 


C3 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 
























































*> ^ 




o 


a 


a 


% 


o 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 






M © 


en 


00 




a 


to 




'ZTj 




T3 


LO 


lO 


CO 


g-S 


00 
00 


,_i 


,_J 


_i 


a 


a' 


a 


2 


a 


a 


a 


^h" 


_^ 


CM 
«» 


CM 


CM 


CM 


N 


esi 




CM 


C^J 


CJ 


c^ 


CM 


(§1 




















































































§ © 

2 s . 


CO 


8 


p 
o 


s 


a 
a 


O 
CM 


a 

00 


a 
a 


a 


s 


s 


a 
»o 


8 


s 


t~- 


t~ 


t~J 


_H 


o 


t> 


oi 


si 


Cl 


esi 


e<i 


CM 


CO 

0» 


B0 


re 


CO 




^ 


1-1 


C3 


CM 


Cl 


CM 


oa e3 




























e> o 




























3 "C 




























O" © 




























£ S 




























2 S 
















































































































c3 




























6 




























O 




























°e 




























© 




























bO 




























T) 




























o 




























G 


DO 


























. 


H 


























tD 


b 


























3 


2 


























"3 


O 


























-d 


B 


























>> 




























X! 




























-o 




























© 




























-d 




























TO 
























































'3 




























!_ 




























3 
































>; 


>. 














© 


U 


© 

— 


© 


oo 




d 

S3 

1 *-j 


S3 

3 

© 


J3 
© 

S3 


c. 

< 


ce 


8} 

□ 

•-s 


>3 

"-9 


3 


© 
© 

CQ 


O 

o 
© 
O 


s 

© 
> 
o 
2 


a 
© 

© 




700 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 






i — » 

© 

©5 

s 

50 





co 


















§ 


g 




2 


1—1 


co 


t^ 


"* 




CO 




o 


co 


o 


S 


00 


00 


X- 










3 


O 










«© 






CM 


CM 


CM 


CN 


CO 


ce 


CO 




CO 




CO 


o 


CO 


SO 


OS 


CO 


O 


t~ 


x 


r^ 


g 


00 


00 




— 








*— > 








■* 




»H 


en 


t^. 


O! 




_ 






oa 




CXD 








e© 




CO 


CO 


cc 


CM 


C3 


CM 


C-3 


e5 


re 


CM 




^_ 


X 


CM 


en 




t^ 


so 


eq 


CTV 






CO 


t- 










CM 


CO 










cs 


CM 




H 


CM 


_ 









,_! 


t~ 


^ 








a» 






"* 








CO 


ro 


re 


re 


CM 




OS 


CO 


Tt< 


§ 


SO 




CM 


r~ 


■CO 




re 


3 


to 


•«*l 


■* 




CO 


CM 


CO 




cc 


r^ 




§ 


co 


co 










|>. 






cxi 


e-j 


CM 




CO 
€© 


CO 


CO 


CO 


"* 


CO 


CO 




"* 


-* 








"* 


l>. 


CT: 


CM 


CO 




^ 


t- 


CO 








US 


«a 








S-H 


-5" 




Ol 


~" 


us 


"5 


00 


Oi 














_l 












e© 


CN 


<N 




CO 


CO 


CO 


CC 


re 


CO 


re 


CO 




00 
























*c* 


o> 


re 


co 




X 


"* 


>a 


cr 


r^ 


c^ 


CO 


CO 


s 


























CM 
«© 


CM 


<M 


CM 


N 






cm 


CN 


ei 




CM 




_ 


iO 


DO 


t>. 






o 




LC 


-* 


CO 




eo 




■* 








CO 




"3- 




— 






en 














t^ 


x 




CO 




t^. 




(M 


CO 


CM 


CM 


CN 


CM 


CM 


CN 


CM 


CN 


CM 




















5 


3 








c© 


o 


ce 


X 


r- 


o 


ua 


— 




t- 










f~^ 








t^ 










CM 

«© 


c-i 


•M 


CM 


M 


ce 


N 


<M 


r<i 


<M 


<M 


<M 




s 




CO 










^ 


CO 






CO 


1H 


t^ 


•H 


o 




ua 


OS 




re 


t^ 


•H 




e 
en 




















— 






6© 


CN 


CM 




CM 


CM 


(M 


esi 


<M 


<M 


<M 


CM 
























1^ 


CO 


§ 


CM 


r^- 


r; 


08 


CO 


US 


CO 


** 


»o 


K5 


<M 


o 


t^ 




CM 








CO 


rH 


~ 


ao 


X 


«>- 




cxi 

«© 


CO 


CO 


rc 


CM 


cc 


re 


CO 










en 


o 
o 


s 


§ 


8 


5 


§ 


O 


§ 


§ 


g 


8 




00 
















_ 


,_i 


H 


X 






CVI 


CM 


(M 


CM 


CM 


EN 


<M 


CO 


CO 


CO 






05 




















































& 


























55 


























o 




• 




















§ 




























« 

a 

03 


c3 

3 


c3 


"C 
a 
< 


>> 

c3 


l-B 




m 

3 
M 

3 


u 

= 

a 

X 


— 
O 
o 

O 


0) 

S 

> 

o 
2 


CD 
S 

co 

o 
ca 

Q 



1910.1 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



701 



^2 

OO 

1 









t-» 




fr~ 


r^ 


t>. 


•*< 


to 


CO 


CO 


o 




o 


o 


o 














































" 


w 




























s 














l> 








t^ 


o 


o 


o 


OS 


o 


o 


© 


o 




o 


o 


o> 


























3 


e» 


























CM 






lO 


kC 


ro 


CM 




CO 


lO 


t> _ 


Id 
















CM 






CN 
































00 


W 


























3 


s 




00 




m 


CO 


00 


o 




t^. 






o 






CM 


CO 


CO 


us 


































00 


«» 


























co 






CM 


CM 




CM 




CO 










CM 


CM 


■>> 


CM 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CM 


c-i 




o 


o 






























ae 


























^ 


CO 


o 


00 


CO 


_ 


U3 


■* 


o 


. 


eo 


o 


CO 


lO 


iC 


>o 


its 


»c 










cc 


CO 


CO 


en 


























2 


w 
























. 


t^ 




00 


O0 








o 


CO 






i>- 


CM 


CO 


CO 


LO 


o 


us 


CO 


co 


CO 


CO 


CO 


»>. 


CO 




























00 


e» 






























^ 












fr- 


fc- 














CO 








CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 






























<e 


























<* 


00 


~ 


CO 




SO 


^ 


t^ 


OS 


CM 












a 


'DO 


oo 


os 


~ 


CS 


O! 


— 


co 




en 

00 


CM 


CM 






















. 


t-- 
























2 


00 


00 


CO 








fr- 


00 


oo 






CM 


S 


S 


















CM 


CN 


CM 




o 




© 


N 




CO 






CN 




CM 




oo 


CO 


CO 


CO 




co 


b- 




GO 


Oi 


a> 


OS 


00 


s 


CM 


CM 


<M 


CN 
































































































a 


























H 


























a 


























o 


























s 




























£ 


£ 














CO 


1 


u 

V 


CO 




(- 
- 

C 

OS 


3 
fa 


- 


< 


03 

Is 


o 

c 

3 


t-s 


CO 

3 
M 

3 


ti 
J 

i 


— 
o 
o 

o 


ti 
© 
> 
o 
55 


a 

CD 

o 

CD 





702 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



, CD 

o 

O 



r 



cq 



jo 







00 


CO 




Cl 




Cl 








8 














00 


00 


CO 


00 


an 


co 


OS 


o 






e 




















Cl 


Cl 






1-1 






























o 


■«* 






t^ 


Cl 
















£ 








•"• 


o 


OS 


OS 


OS 


as 


C2 


C73 


OS 




s 


Cl 


CI 


CI 


CI 


Cl 




















CO 


-* 


o 


-* 




so 




Cl 












5r 


■»* 




'^l 


"* 




** 


■* 


co 


co 




o 


o 






ci 


CI 


ci 


CI 


CI 


Cl 


Cl 


cq 


Cl 


Cl 


Cl 


<M 








IO 


l> 




Cl 








Cl 










09 


'-* 


1-1 


I -1 




co 


Cl 


Cl 


co 


co 


CO 


■* 






CJ 


CN 


CI 


CI 


Cl 


Cl 


Cl 


Cl 


Cl 


Cl 


Cl 


(M 










t~ 
























oo 


00 


CO 


OS 


oo 


co 


CO 


02 


OS 


o 


o 






T-l 


e» 


















Cl 


Cl 


<M 






^ 


OS 




OS 
























t- 


r-- 


t^ 


!>• 


t>- 


1^ 


t^ 


<o 


SO 


so 


!>• 




§ 


«© 






















































2 

as 






ci 


1—1 




o 


o 


OS 


03 


en 




t~ 




3 


CI 


<N 


<M 


CI 


Cl 


Cl 
















o 










(>. 












T-H 




e* 


OS 


o 






CI 


Cl 


Cl 




o 


o 


OS 


o 




* 


rH 


Cl 


CI 


<N 


CI 


Cl 


Cl 


Cl 


Cl 


Cl 


,_| 


<M 




































CI 






_ 


m 








^ 


U3 


1H 






"5 


S2 




t^- 


00 


oo 


CO 










































en 


«0 








































Cl 














o 


CO 


"* 


CO 


Cl 




o 


CO 


so 


■o 


<* 


lO 






o> 


e© 


cq 


CI 


CI 


CI 


Cl 




















Cl 


CI 


Cl 


so 


so 


b« 


o 


o 


o 


<N 


OS 




o> 


CO 


"tf 


t^ 


O0 


t- 




Cl 


Tjt 












00 


€© 










Cl 


Cl 


Cl 


Cl 


<M 


Cl 


Cl 




m 




















































































E-t 




























5 




























O 




























§ 


































o 


< 


>> 


a 

1-5 


>> 

»-9 




c 

5 
o 

ft 


o 

o 

o 


« 

a 

> 
o 


a 





1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 703 

Labor Cost of Tin Plate, per Box of 108 Pounds, 14 by 20 Size, 1898-1909. 

[1893-98 from report of the Industrial Commission, 1900, Vol. I., p. 868, note; 1899-1909 from a 
letter to Prof. J. W. Jenks, dated April 18, 1910, signed by W. J. Filbert, Comptroller, United 
States Steel Corporation.] 

1893, $1.60 

1894, 1.33 

1895, 1.33 

1896, 1.00 

1897, 1.00 

1898, 1.00 

1899 99 

1900, 1.00 

1901, 93 

1902, 93 

1903, 98 

1904, 85 

1905, 83 

1906, .82 

1907, 87 

1908, 81 

1909, 84 



704 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



S3 

©a 

f 



=q 



CQ 





CM 


cm 




CO 


us 


'-r 


s 




^ 


-■n 






. 


*"■ 


t- 


l> 








r~ 


r> 


00 


00 


o> 


« 


CM 


cm 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 




,_< 




C. 


CM 






,_, 




,_, 




1- 


_, 




00 


oo 


00 


OS 


X 


r^ 


O 




t^ 


b- 


l> 


t- 


©» 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


(M 


cM 


CM 


CM 


cq 


CM 


CM 




o 


_ 


r^ 


_ 


00 


CO 


^_ 


OS 


t^ 


c 


ec 




t- 


CO 


CO 


CM 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


'- 1 


•~ 




OS 


00 


cn 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


eo 


eo 


CM 


CM 




so 


b- 


OS 


CO 


■*f 


us 


CO 










t. 


to 




Oi 


OS 




1—1 












CM 


CM 


e> 


CM 


CM 


CM 


co 


CO 


CO 


ec 


eo 


CO 


eo 


CO 


CO 




■* 


f. 










--o 




^ 




T _ l 




US 


to 


CO 




r^ 


-_ 


CO 


CO 


t^. 


00 


00 


OS 


CS 


0> 


cm 

6© 


<M 


cq 


CM 


CM 


CNI 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


eM 


CM 




eo 


^ 


MH 


^ 


CO 


S3 


OS 


_ 


05 








s 

en 

1-1 






CO 






US 






"* 




US 


US 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


c-i 


CN| 


CM 


« 


CM 






CM 








s 
















O 


"-I 








OS 


OS 


cr. 


OS 


t^ 


t^ 


o 
e» 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


cm 


<M 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CNI 


1 . 


co 


-, 


CO 


_ 


OS 


o 




OS 




00 


CM 












'"' 


■"■< 








OS 






OS 


o 


CM 


CM 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


■CO 


CO 


05 


CM 


CM 


CM 










,_, 


















,_J 


US 


US 


CO 


t^ 


r^ 


r^ 


t^ 




r~ 


CC 


00 


CO 




CM 


CM 


eq 


eM 


CM 


CM 


cm 


CM 


CM 


C5 


CM 


CM 




o 


tH 


3C 


cc 


O 


3 


CNI 


T* 


CO' 


OS 


cc 


,_, 




CO 


■*** 


co 


CM 


1—1 






us 


"«* 


LO 




O 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


CM 


CM 


CM 


05 


CM 


CM 






,_, 


,_, 


,_, 














_ 






CO 


TjH 


*>• 


oo 




© 


CM 


T* 


US 


us 


■* 


CM 


2 
oo 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


eo 


eo 


CO 


CO' 


CO 


00 


CO 








t^ 


^ 


^ 


l>. 


r^ 


T* 


CO 


eo 


CO 


o 


i 


o 


O 


c 


o 








^^ 


" 


^^ 


1-1 




est 


eM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


cq 


CM 


CM 


CM 




US 

o 


3 


US 

o 


o 


00 


c 
o 


o 
o 


§ 


O 


3 


t> 


s 


en 

00 


CM 

6© 


CM 


CM 


CM 


1-1 


CM 


eN 


CM 


C-5 


CM 


CM 


CM 








«* 






en 


CM 


^ 


CO 


US 


^ 


us 








i-H 


CM 


CM 


c-i 


CM 












en 

00 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CN| 


CM 


CM 


CN 


CM 


CM 


CM 










_ 






CO 


rt 


CO' 


CO 


o 


r^ 




CO 


eo 


CO 


"* 




US 




•>■ 




•> 






en 
oo 

i "* 


CM 


CM 


CM 


(M 


CM 


eM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CM 












US 


^ 


US 


OS 


CO 


t^. 


CM 


OS 


*n 


us 


US 


US 


US 


















00 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CN 


(M 


cq 


CM 


<M 


CM 


CM 


CNI 


CNI 














,_, 


LO- 


tX 


o 


r^ 


co 


o 




























s 


CO 

«© 


eo 


00 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


CM 


CNI 


CM 


co 


























a 


























H 


























fc 


























o 


























a 


el 

C 


eS 

3 

CO 


J3 

= 

5 


a 

< 


>> 

- 


e 
•-a 


>. 
l-B 


CO 

< 


0) 

XI 

B 

<D 
ft 
CU 


0) 

— 


a 



u 

s 
t 

o 


u 
Xi 

S 
g 

<D 1 

Q 1 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



705 






-3 



co 


— 


CQ 


co 

J3 


SS 


Oh 


a 


>> 


o 


.Q 


s. 


T) 






s 


-^ 


^ 


a 


-^ 


? 


CO 


» 

o 


<o 








5^ 


io 


fti 


v: 


( S?s 


^~" 


-=r 








K 




© 




* 




V 




C* 




C 




fc 







o 


a 


o 


e 


© 




o 


o 




o 


CO 


o 


o 
en 


fr- 




IO 


tj< 


■^ 




■«*< 






IO 


IO 


CO 


s? 


CO 


eo 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


CO 


CO 


eo 


CO 


CO 




« 
























2 


fr- 


I~ 






fr- 






t-i 




fr- 




fr- 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


eo 


eo 


CO 


CO 


eo 


eo 


eo 


eo 




o 
























e 
en 


o 


-. 


o» 


— 


as 


C5 


© 


© 


oa 


OS 


OB 


c» 


i>> 


CO 


CO 


eo 


eo 


CO 


CO 


eo 


eo 


eo 


CO 


eo 




fr- 
























i 


Tj< 


IO 


IO 


IO 


CO 








fr- 


X 


o> 


S3 


'S.- 


eo 


CO 


eo 


eo 


eo 


CO 


eo 


ee 


CO 


eo 


CO 




IO 
























o 
at 


in 


"0 


IO 


IO 


»o 


LO 


IO 


IO 


IO 








m 


CO 


CO 


eo 


eo 


CO 


eo 


eo 


eo 


eo 


eo 


CO 






























© 


o 




O 


o 


o 




§ 


O 


a 




o 


s 




IC 


IO 


IO 




IO 








t^ 






T}< 


•* 


-*< 


-»< 


•* 


■* 


eo 






eo 


-* 


a* 


CO 

eft 


CO 


CO 


eo 


eo 


eo 


cc 


eo 


CO 


eo 


eo 


co 




























I 


o 


co 




X 


X 


ao 


00 


00 


00 


j: 




CO 


CO 


























«# 


















































3 


o 


~ 


o 


- 


© 


— 


o 


o 


o 


o 


to 


CO 


0> 


6© 


■"* 


** 


-* 


Tf 


"* 


"* 


■* 


"* 


"* 


CO 


CO 




























S 


o 


= 


o 


o 


= 


s 


= 


=; 


o 


c 


= 


o 




■"* 


"* 


"* 


"* 


-# 


Tt< 


<* 


■<* 


"* 


"* 


■*t< 


- 






,n 








IO 












o 


09 


CO 


CO 


CO 


<£ 


SO 


CO 


CO 


"# 


c 


c 


o 


1 


SB 


"* 


-* 


«* 


"* 


-CH 


•«*( 


■* 


•^ 


"* 


"* 


"* 








-' 


X 


£ 


^ 


J' 


— 


o 


o 


£3 


o 




CO 




CM 


cm 


CM 


CM 


t» 












CO 
CO 


CO 


"* 


•* 


**< 


"* 


T* 


»o 


IO 


IO 


o 


IO 




























00 














o 


o 


o 


oa 


OS 




CO 


eo 


CO 


eo 


eo 


CO 


CO 


eo 


BO 


CM 


-^ 


CO 




o 


= 


IO 


e 


o 


IO 


o 




•o 


IO 


IO 


IO 


SI 
00 


-It 


CO 


eo 


•>* 


^*< 


CO 


CO 


CM 


— 1 


1-1 


■~ 


1-1 




























e» 


























o 


"0 


IO 


»o 


IO 


IO 


o 


— 


IO 


IO 


o 


lO 


en 

00 






IB 


i-t 




«o 




r — 








-* 




























w 














































;$? 








"0 


IC 










IO 


«o 




t- 




s 


fr- 


fr- 


fr* 


'- 




fr- 






fr- 


fr- 


CO 




^ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


ee 


eo 


eo 


eo 


co 


eo 


CO 




























EC 


























k 


























O 


























s 


>> 


>; 














B 
a 

Q> 


. 


cS 

Si 


CO 
J2 




71 

a 
a 


3 

1 


■3 
o 
u 

- 


< 


>> 

- 


CO 

s 

3 

-5 




CD 

3 
u 

3 

<5 


o 

O 
O 

o 


CO 

> 
o 


a 

CO 

8 

CO 

Q 



a is 

'5 3 



>> is 

fc, CO 

a 



S § S 

CO ~ — 

on .— i , 

co *o 

I -.2 J 

.E»go 
p. ■ I ■ 

I ft | ^ 
§ ^^ -a 

• U 3 2 

i«?S 

-Q ^ io g 

<*- c3 O "-" 

O « ■« ^3 

o s *• a 

■Sail 

O * w Q 



706 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



-3 

i 



1 8 

CO I 



^ CQ 
co -s? 



50 



^•2 






^ ft, 

5? 



co 
© 



co ^3 

so h 

co S3 

4* 



©• 


CO 




=3 


V 

£ 


« 


fti 


w 


» 


■8? 


^S 


CO 


g 


^ 


CD 




fei 








<M 




rO 










00 


CO 


t^ 


"* 


US 


^ 


CO 


t> 


CO 








3 






b" 






fr- 


t^ 


CO 


O 


to 


to 


CO 


























1-1 


©& 


























CO 


ta 


^ 




CO 
























r~ 


















3 


o 
























T-l 




























o 


es 






CO 




















o 


«o 


o 


"0 


io 


«3 


t- 


c^ 


OS 


OS 


o 


o 






















^, 


,H 




























tH 


CO 






CO 














s 


o 






IO 


»a 


U9 


!>• 




to 


to 


CO 


CO 




























6© 


























^^ 


00 


*a 


N 


to 


CO 
























00 


oa 




c^ 


c^ 




























































*-l 




























o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 






© 




R 












CM 


so 


CO 






Cl 
















oo 




CO 


00 
























































































CO 


CO 


o 


IO 


U5 


o 


w 




oo 


o 


























OS 


OS 


OO 


s 




























m> 


























&• 


co 




OS 












CO 






£ 


1-1 




OS 


CO 


oo 


cc 


oo 


OS 


o 


© 


c^ 


to 


_, 


,_! 














rH 


_ 








SO 


























00 


LO 


■* 


oa 


CO 


CM 




to 


to 




CO 




o 




■># 


CO 


co 


CO 


Cl 


Cl 


CO 


Cl 


CO 


IH 






























«^ 
































t^ 


















e 


CO 


CO 


CO 


co 


UO 


CO 


oo 


o 


OS 


LO 


>* 


CO 


























tH 


e» 






























^ 


S 


£ 


X 


» 






















CO 


o 














0> 








Tj< 


•* 


I- 1 






Th 
































* H 






























cs 




co 




co 




to 








© 


« 












© 


OS 


00 


00 


c~ 


b- 


OS 






















































l« 


!D 


o 


OS 


<M 


io 


o 


o 


00 


«* 


00 


^^ 


S 


CO 


C] 


co 


CO 


>* 


co 


CO 


Cl 








•"< 




























^ 




































CO 




OS 


o-j 


o 




o 


o> 




V3 


^r< 


co 


<* 


co 


CO 


eo 


CO 


CO 


co 


CO 


























*H 


6© 


























o 








o 






© 




o 


IO 


© 








t^ 












Cl 


t> 


t~ 


OO 


s 


CO 


co 


CO 


CO 


Cl 














7 ~ l 


^ 


_ 


_l 


rH 


_H 


,_, 


,_l 


,_| 






_l 


^H 




6% 
























03 


























n 


























& 


























z 


























o 


























3 


. 


s 














(V 


_ 




(1) 




S3 

a 

03 
1-3 


o 

a 

u 




a 
< 


>> 


a 


13 

1-5 


DO 

< 


G 


! 




Id 

s 


a 

Q 



1910.1 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



707 



<3 
1 



IS ft 



* 8 






I 

o 







5 








CO 


s 


00 


© 






-*< 




cm 


CO 


CO 


IO 




IO 










3 


•^< 


•*< 


-* 


■* 


"* 


»o 


IO 


IO 


ua 


iO 


IO 












o 


o 




CO 


CO 


3 


cc 




oo 


o 




sa 


o 


















8 


s 


Tj< 


CO 


' 


, 


Tfl 


tr 


* 




■* 


Tt* 
















io 


CM 


co 


CM 


<M 


<M 


(M 


i 


oo 


00 


t- 


fr« 


fr- 




I* 


fr- 


fr- 


fr- 




fr- 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


ee 


ee 


ee 


CO 


ee 






^ 










a 


S 


£ 


































s 

CO 


CO 


IO 


•o 


IQ 


uo 


IQ 


•>*< 


-*< 




■n* 






CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


co 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 






.In 






_"' 


_\ 










ix 




























CO" 


us 


t^. 


co 


co 


as 


CO 


CO 


fr- 


t^ 




fr- 




s 


& 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CO 


co 


CO 


ee 


CO 


CO 












SJ 


Xx 


X\ 


^ 












§ 
























s 


25 


OS 


o> 


oa 


a> 


os 


OB 


o> 


o 


oa 


oo 


IO 


IO 


■^ 


•* 


-* 


•>* 


^ 


"tfl 


>* 


■* 


CO 


CO 
































N~) 




^ 






S? 






S? 








IO 


N 


o 






3 








CN 


e 


o 


OS 


CO 


co 


CO 


















00 


IO 


>o 


"5 


IQ 


»o 


IO 


IO 


IQ 


IQ 


IQ 


IO 


IO 
















^ 












H 


HO 


cc 


IO 

CO 


IQ 

oo 


00 


IO 

00 


CO 

oo 


3 


3 


£ 


s 


s 


CO 

1H 


3 


Tj< 


«* 


T* 


** 


^* 


-* 


«# 


^ 


Tj< 


IO 


IO 












_? 






^ 






* 






CO 


CO 






















• 


CO 


"* 


ee 


CO 


CM 


CO 


CO 


<* 


co 


CO 


CM 


CM 


i 


US 


IO 


IQ 


IQ 


>o 


ua 


IQ 


IO 


IQ 


IO 


IQ 


IO 




























N 




s 


£ 


S 




$ 


X 






» 






r^ 


«# 


t^ 


3 




CO 






o 


O 


o 


00 




-*< 


■"#< 












*JH 


rf 






-*< 




" 


•<}< 


<# 


** 


T* 


IO 


IO 


>o 


IO 




i\ 


£ 






^ 






^ 




^' 














CO 


r^ 




3 


cl 


CO 






CM 


s 














CO 


UO 


fr- 




^* 


•f 


-*l 


■* 


-* 


<# 


*# 


*# 


■* 


•* 


-t< 


"* 


TH 


































S 














^ 












03 


co 








CO 








1 
















IO 


co 




Ol 


CM 


■<* 


Tt< 


-f. 


># 


-r 


■«< 


«* 


<# 


-f 


•+ 


■*** 






























B9 


























O 


























S 




























1 

a 

1-9 


i 

— 


4 

s 


< 


OS 


s 

9 

-5 




1 
< 


O 

a 

QQ 


& 

o 

S 




i 

a 

> 

1 


9 

a 
1 

Q 



2 S 



708 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



•(pnnoj iad aoijj; 
sSBjaAy) Srqj :oooBqoj, 



OMU5NOO«OOMiaMXNOOOWOOO< 

laooieoooiocoNnia^ooocooooi 

O O !>■ Oi o o oo t- r^ — 

•*-<*<ccie«5Tt!^coco- 



KtOOlOt 



•(punoj iad aouj 
•ubjq 'Sui^orag :ooo^qox 



ooooooooc 
ogooooooc 



!O(O!DlOt»Q0l 



;s§§; 



•(^88 J -^ 
J8d 80IJJ 8SBI8AY) 5[0Op3I9JJ 



ooio«oo*<o_ 



. o oo ao cq oo io o 



NNNM' 



IM5CU3100NN-1NOO' 



5 

•S 

I 



•(188J *J\[ J8d 80U(J 



"MOOOOOOWraOOOWOMNreNNffl 

n»oooooooonou5«owe»rt(oe 

.0000lOCO"tf<<M(M'<tieO 

.= SC 

CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO ' 



•Qaqsng; iad 

80IIJ 8SBJ8Ay) qSBQ 1%'BQVfJ^ 



.lOOM^fflOOOOJCJi 
lt»Nt>NNOONO:OHH 



■(pj«A Jad 

80UJ 8BBI8AY) "JJ |J8J8d 

-daj '^-^ uaioiq :sSupaaqg 



^o®ooMNiocqNoc:a!Oooij<oO'*ocoot» 



•(punoj 

J8d 8 I J j; 8§BI8Ay) 

SnqppiH ' puBjdri ruo^oQ 



•(punoj jad aou<£ sSb 

-I8AV) lOO^ IXV 'JIB^ 8q} 



INNNO00ei001»0!0)OOOCa 



82 



•(punoj jad 80UJ aSBja 
-Ay) pamoog ap-ei*) % '% 
'aoaafj; unupaj^ otqo : l°°M 



coo<coNoe»ioffl»iflffit)OOJOoiooec:r.o 



•(JTBJ J9d 801 JJ 
8S-BI8Ay) !qa^ JBa^pOOQ 
'SSOqg p3JOXnp3g JfBQ 

s ( u8j^ :saoqg puB e^oog 



i-*-*'-*'*cocNieNicocococoeot^.coooc»o 
cq cn cxi cn exi <n e<i exi cn> cnj w exj e<i ci cn in" cn e*> cn co co 



•(^OOJ 
8H3Tlbg J8d 80TJJ 8SBJ8 

-Ay) uszoQ aq^ b% spunoj 
0* o* OS 'JFO ' XT *M : Jaq^Bai 



00050! 



) tJ< OS ■<** O CO - 



>0 U5 CO — ■ 

ItONOOOi 

> CO CO CO CO co SO < 



) O r~- t— CO CO CO 

■ CO CO CO 00— C" 



(putlOJ I8d 80U,1 8gBJ8Ay) 
SI88;g 8Aiq.'BJSl A^VBajJ ,SJ8 

-jfO'Bjj 'psipag 'uaajf) : sap 12 



CO — O© — OO 

couot^-tf* - "* 1 ^ — Ciiocoococococo 

» OOO N ffl O OO C3 -H CN> — CM CO 



lO^NOOCJCC^WffiNN 



OOOOO — o< 



•(prmoj 
jad 8ouj aSBjaAy) eapig 
8ai^]^ qeaij 'jaag :^aj# 



_i00N00 — OOOMCO^CB 

_ _ji-.oor^t^cot"-.i--.oooor~05r^oooot^ooCT>C5c» 
ooooooooooooooooooooo 



•(spunoj 001 
jad aoiij aS^JSAy) aotoqo 
o % p b o o '6iaa}g fsfttBQ 



IflCOlfl-^lO^CNICOCO — OO— HNlOMNIMOOCSO 

t^r~-cscs>-<t<-«*i*-<co - '#'OcoOt^ — CNiOit^CMt^cxio 

MO5O:«NMNr>.O00CC:~iOC3:-iK5-<CSiOlO 
— 0^00«505<MI>.OOCOCOUOlflO— "CqcOOOCJS^t^ 

■^HU5'*'* - *'*'* , '<* |, <* H »OlOOCOlO»OlO»OlC>OCCCO 

0*-<"<NM*"lOONMC»o"-C<rn'1<"lOCONOCC:''c 
OC3O0SC^C:C50?C;OOOOOOOOOOO — 
0000000000000000000005C505C5O50505C505OC5 



1910.1 HOUSE — No. 1750. 709 



Appendix H. 



STATISTICS OF CRIME, PAUPERISM AND INSANITY. 



[Taken from the reports of the Prison Commissioners, the State Board of Charity and the 
State Board of Insanity.] 



Pauperism in Cities and Towns to March 31, 1909. 

Population by census of 1905, 3,003,680 

Whole number of paupers per 1,000 inhabitants (excluding 

vagrants), 26.01 

Persons fully supported during the year : — 
Aggregates : — 

Whole number, 12,581 

Average number, 6,665.1 

Number March 31, 1909, 6,395 

In almshouses : — 

Whole number, 9,805 

Average number, 4,837J 

Number March 31, 1909, 4,959 

In other institutions : — 

Whole number, 1,475 

Average number, 753.6 

Number March 31, 1909, 313 

In private families : — 

Whole number, 1,348 

Average number, 1,074.4 

Number March 31, 1909, 1,123 

Persons partially supported : — 

Whole number reported, 66,295 

Approximate average number, 22,040 

Daily average of vagrancy, 89,857 



710 COST OF LIVING. [May, 



Cost of Support and Belief in Cities and Towns to March 31, 1909. 
Cost of full support : — 

Expense at almshouses, $1,135,201.00 

Expense at other institutions, .... 152,139.00 

Expense in private families, 146,033.00 

Total of full support, $1,433,373.00 

Expense of partial support, 1,036,006.00 

Miscellaneous expenses, chiefly administrative, . . 229,003.00 

Aggregate of ordinary expenses, . . . . $2,698,382.00 

Reimbursements : — 

At almshouses, $307,565.00 

Out of almshouses, 250,216.00 

Net ordinary expenses : — 

Total, 2,140,601.00 

Amount per inhabitant, by census of 1905, . . .712 

Extraordinary expenses : — 

Almshouse improvements, ...... 25,598.00 

Miscellaneous, 24,000.00 

Whole Number and Treatment of the Several Cases of Paupers in 

Cities and Toivns to March 31, 1909. 
Whole number mentally defective : — 
Insane : — 

In almshouses, 245 

Boarded in private families, 17 

Idiotic : — 

In School for Feeble-minded, 419 

In almshouses, 243 

Boarded in private families, 46 

Sane persons supported or relieved : — 
Epileptic : — 

In Monson Hospital, 269 

Elsewhere, . 65 

Children under sixteen : — 

In almshouses, 754 

In other institutions, 145 

Boarded in private families, 827 

Relieved at their homes, 33,098 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



711 



Persons over sixteen : — 
In almshouses, 
In other institutions, . 
Boarded in private families, 
Relieved at their homes, 



8,541 
537 
471 

32,444 



Whole number supported or relieved : — 
Total (excluding vagrants), 
All ages under 60, or unknown, . 

60 to 70, 

70 to 80, 

Over 80, .... 



78,123 

69,098 

4,446 

3,159 

1,420 



Population of the Totvn Almshouses, March 31, 1906-09. 





1906. 


1907. 


1908. 


1909. 


Sane, 


4,339 


4,216 


4,528 


4,608 


Insane, 


168 


181 


135 


130 


Idiotic, 


191 


186 


193 


205 


Epileptic 


22 


21 


18 


16 


Total, 


4,720 


4,605i 


4,874i 


4,959 


Persons over sixteen, .... 


4,594 


4,526 


4,457 


4,835 


Children under sixteen, .... 


126 


79 


117 


124:- 



1 These totals appear to be incorrect, but are taken from the report of the State Board of 
Charity as they stand. 



712 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



OOHN«TjliO( 



— ut Sxiipna siea^. paiogjo I 2Sh2222SSSS222S2 



NM»O'H(NC0'*l0®NMO 

0S0505OOOOOOOOOO 

OS 05 O Ol OS OS OS OS O OS 



•sssbq jo laqxnnj^; 



•ps^xn 
-psg; ptn3 jen^oy — ^soq 



lOCDt^ OSt^ 00 



HOOTtlNOOOfflOfflNNlMMM- 
QOOOMUNCOaNOOONffiCOrHOI 
■>*lt».eNi-H<MOOCOt~CS-'*05COU30< 



O0)0SNiHO"*00i 
COlO-*"*-*COO<M- 



OOHHUJOO) 
N-*ONOO(S 
OO iO <N CO -*f "A 



cocococococo-<*icocnicoco< 



000)NOOO^U)H<onOCONtO 

W . N . 1 '?. N . . M . H . H . . 00 . N . H .®. H . IN . 
cfflioNO® i-Tj^ToTto co os os o od 10 co co°"os"i-TeNf 

— 1 CO <m cq CN) CN H <M cq 



5^ 

Si. 
S3 

<5 



o 

e 

I 



■S^9STiq013SS13;[\[ JO 

qxn^tq'BTpii qoeg o^ ^soq 



•^SOQ 



ItOOJOSOINOClM 

■ ic ■* ■* cm os co 

I ■>* -* lO Ui CO OS 



od cnTco «-"o r-Tcq" TjH'Tjrcyf oT t^Teq co **co"tC-T -*jT Tt~c© 

CC*rHfflTt(C^Tj(^Tf(^rt00W^NO>N05C0OO 



•SUMOX 

puis sai^iQ ui *8Ai^ , Bj^sraiui 
-py A"g9Yqo 'sgsn'gdxa'jgq^o 



CONO«IOOtOCOOtOO)OilMlOrtOOM(NMtOHM 
OOlONlNtO(Nc<3WOOr-lCit^OOt>rJ(<McOCO'>*CqO 
t0N*ONNQ0(M(0 0J<SC0'-l«IMOOO«t-O 



■>*< »o l>- OO 00 lO < 



•e^gsnqo 
-•essi3j\[ jo %we%iqmjjui 
qoBg; o^ pi\zu Jo ^oq 



•paAatpy; nosjaj qoT3g; 
jo ^so'5 Ajs^g^ aSBjaAy 



•paA8i|9'}j aaqran^; 
eSBiaAy ' a^nnxoiddy 



•jeiPH J° 1 S0 



rH05M»NOO'*OH'*CO(NOOOL'5T|H050(MtD 

cowcqcNicqcqcococococococococococococococo 



OOe<MMt0OMNt0MOrtH(D00«)CTO<0>0 



i-tt~.-lC0C0-'#Oi-lt~00C0CNl©OSO00OS^Hi-l-<^O 
OOCOOOOO.-l^H-*t--05" , 5^0S-«*lT-II^C©r-l-*CO->*<-<# 
COCOCOlOlOOSTtHCOt^COOSi-HI^-Oa-^OO-^CNIi-lt^O 



NNNOOIO' _ 

io o "O to is o h to"«"N cnTooco co osi>r-<3*co No'm" 

00NMCDlOOl000m(NM05N0)O)ONNrt<0000 
COC050®tONOON000305MOOOOOOOS050iai050 



•S^^98tiqO'BgS*BJ\[ JO 

^u^iq'eqni qcreg; o^ %soq 



•pg^iod 
■dng i9qnin|v[ 9SBJ9Ay 



•^joddng jo ^soo [^oj, 



•9I9q.4i.9gia %B0Q 



*(NOOU5OiMC0NN' 



CO !>. CO CO t~ !>. t~ I 



I CO CO CO UO CO 00 CO 



coco^oo<Ni>.t-.coco _ 

OOOrHr-IOCXIlOOOOOffllOOON 
1— !<MCOCNllOTtlM<COCOOI>-t^lr^ 

i-T rt t-T cJ cnT co* •<* -# tjT co o co i>* 



■*«HN«l(Oi 



. lOCO CO OS 

iqqqqHNH 

"o0 oToT^T^COlft 



O-*O010)N05NeqNMOlO00OC0'HNT-(O'H 
t--<fCOOSi-C-^ICOOOCNlTtlt^0005CN|rHOO»0-'*<t^i-ICO 

Oiuo(M(Mi-i(MoacocooocOirc)t^>o-*05CNicq^HCN)co 



itONNQOOOi 



cqcNcqcqcNcqcococococO'* 



■<*r^OO«500-'*iOCOOOOSOS> 



1^CO-*CO-*I-*CO'*'* 

in cq as >o t)i oo i-nc ffl 

CO CO CO O"* o<n" CO oco ooco cn tCco *h'o" cn ■>* CO 
<MOS^HCNl-*J<CX10Sli300000-HCOCN)CN|<MOCNlWCOO 
S<l(MlMCNlCNIC0CNle0^e0-*l0>OC0C0t^00O00O<M 



"B^ldBQ I9d ^SOQ 



•^eoo 



K5iMTHOC0<*OC0NOO0)rH00-*O'*aiTtlN00 



ICOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO-* 



—# CO T* CO ®,® rt .MON'*N 

r c* t>r o i-T oo co «s 

. I~- OS OS CO "* OS CO 

■ 00 00O)0!OOrH(N(DC0lON 



oqiooqoo 

OOr^CO 
OS CO CO CO CO CO 00 




H O 

< w 



•■B^ldBQ J9d }SOQ 



•^soo 



eo<Ncor-iMcqiMMMcqco'*m«5«oooooNoort 
c>?eqc<ic^cNcNicieq(>icNeNicicNicqc<icNcNicNcococo 



I OS OS CO <M OO OO 
• OOOltCOXD 

iMOW^qq 

"O I-TOS CO «5 TjTi— Too i-i" 0^-^*0 r^CO OS CO »0 

>(M(MTj(i--cooococqco^qpcO'^ic»cqcpc - 



OOCOlOCOCO-^^TtlCOCNK 



.NQOooooooooooaioooortHcqoPsi 



— NI ONI 

■QNa SHV3A 1VI0LM0 



iCacOTtllOCOI-^OOOJ 



OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOC35050305C 



1910.' 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



713 



Showing Arrests for Drunkenness and for Other Crimes in Each City and 
in Towns during the Year. 





Popula- 
tion by 
Census 
of 
1905. 








Number of 


Arrests. 






CITIES. 


FOR DRUNKENNESS. 


FOR OTHER CRIMES. 


AGGREGATES. 




M. 


F. 


Tot. 


M. 


F. 


Tot. 


M. 


F. 


Tot. 


Beverly, 


15,223 


243 


3 


246 


161 


8 


169 


404 


11 


415 


Boston, 


595,380 


40,799 


4,325 


45,124 


20,473 


2,444 


22,917 


61,272 


6,769 


68,041 


Brockton, . 


47,794 


992 


37 


1,029 


810 


70 


880 


1,802 


107 


1,909 


Cambridge, 


97,434 


2,009 


151 


2,160 


1,771 


119 


1,890 


3,780 


270 


4,050 


Chelsea, 


37,289 


1,105 


39 


1,144 


737 


51 


788 


1,842 


90 


1,932 


Chicopee, . 


20,191 


474 


19 


493 


280 


14 


294 


754 


33 


787 


Everett, 


29,111 


353 


12 


365 


361 


14 


375 


714 


26 


740 


Fall River, 


105,762 


2,027 


255 


2,282 


1,606 


208 


1,814 


3,633 


463 


4,096 


Fitchburg, 


33,021 


1,073 


16 


1,089 


477 


28 


505 


1,550 


44 


1,594 


Gloucester, 


26,011 


515 


17 


532 


398 


57 


455 


913 


74 


987 


Haverhill, . 


37,830 


918 


48 


966 


547 


31 


578 


1,465 


79 


1,544 


Holyoke, . 


49,934 


1,156 


92 


1,248 


546 


33 


579 


1,702 


125 


1,827 


Lawrence, . 


70,050 


2,711 


244 


2,955 


1,211 


115 


1,326 


3,922 


359 


4,281 


Lowell, 


94,889 


3,038 


310 


3,348 


1,055 


74 


1,129 


4,093 


384 


4,477 


Lynn, 


77,042 


1,703 


105 


1,808 


1,307 


107 


1,414 


3,010 


212 


3,222 


Maiden, 


38,037 


313 


17 


330 


385 


34 


419 


698 


51 


749 


Marlborough, 


14,073 


221 


7 


228 


186 


8 


194 


407 


15 


422 


Medford, . 


19,686 


125 


7 


132 


241 


7 


248 


366 


14 


380 


Melrose, 


14,295 


98 


8 


106 


98 


3 


101 


196 


11 


207 


New Bedford, . 


74,362 


1,257 


156 


1,413 


799 


89 


888 


2,056 


245 


2,301 


Newburyport, . 


14,675 


197 


10 


207 


237 


19 


256 


434 


29 


463 


Newton, 


36,827 


477 


19 


496 


475 


36 


511 


952 


55 


1,007 


North Adams, . 


22,150 


562 


21 


583 


385 


29 


414 


947 


50 


997 


Northampton, . 


19,957 


410 


1 


411 


100 


20 


120 


510 


21 


531 


Pittsfield, . 


25,001 


1,145 


26 


1,171 


423 


23 


446 


1,568 


49 


1,617 


Quincy, 


28,076 


584 


11 


595 


482 


40 


522 


1,066 


51 


1,117 


Salem, 


37,627 


1,790 


• 28 


1,818 


680 


28 


708 


2,470 


56 


2,526 


Somerville, 


69,272 


741 


37 


778 


865 


70 


935 


1,606 


107 


1,713 


Springfield, 


73,540 


2,647 


237 


2,884 


977 


72 


1,049 


3,624 


309 


3,933 


Taunton, . 


30,967 


1,479 


38 


1,517 


335 


18 


353 


1,814 


56 


1,870 


Waltham, . 


26,282 


295 


10 


305 


282 


8 


290 


577 


18 


595 


Woburn, 


14,402 


156 


15 


171 


132 


9 


141 


288 


24 


312 


Worcester, . 


128,135 


2,220 


125 


2,345 


1,981 


264 


2,245 


4,201 


389 


4,590 


In cities, . 


2,024,325 


i 73,833 


6,446 


80,279 


40,803 


4,150 


44,953 


114,636 


10,596 


125,232 


In towns, . 


j 979,355 


9,992 


279 


10,271 


11,030 


486 


11,516 


21,022 


765 


21,787 


Totals, 


3,003,680 


83,825 


6,725 


90,550 


51,833 


4,636 


56,469 


135,658 


11,361 


147,019 



714 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



These statistics are suggestive. The figures for drunkenness, which 
is criminal and not pathological under our code, show that while 
drunkenness in the cities furnishes 80,279 arrests, real crime supplies 
only 44,953 cases, their relation being 8 to 4V2' On the other hand, in 
the towns — the rural districts — other offences exceed the cases of 
drunkenness; the figures are 10,271 for drunkenness and 11,516 for all 
other offences, the relation being 10^ to 11 V^ 



Whole Number of Prisoners 


remaining 


f in All Prisons 


September 80, 1909. 


INSTITUTIONS. 


Term 
Sentences. 


Fine and 
Expenses. 


Totals. 


M. 


F. 


Tot. 


M. 


F. Tot. 


M. 


F. 


Tot. 


State Prison, 


848 


- 


848 


- 


- 


- 


848 


- 


848 


Massachusetts Reformatory, . 


876 


- 


876 


- 


- 


- 


876 


- 


876 


Reformatory Prison for Women, 


- 


267 


267 


- 


- 


- 


- 


267 


267 


Prison Camp and Hospital, . 


103 


- 


103 


- 


- 


- 


103 


- 


103 


State Farm 


1,315 


129 


1,444 


- 


- 


- 


1,315 


129 


1,444 


Jails and houses of correction, 


2,574 


318 


2,892 


446 


31 


477 


3,020 


349 


3,369 


Awaiting trial in jails, 














321 


35 


356 


Totals, 


5,716 


714 


6,430 


446 


31 


477 


6,483 


780 


7,263 



Expenditures, Receipts and Cost of Support in Jails and Houses of 
Correction for the Year. 

Expenditures : — 

Salaries and wages, $293,821.91 

Other expenses, 429,540.68 



Total, $723,362.59 



Receipts, exclusive of payments of fines and expenses : — 
From industries, . 
From other sources, . " . 



Total, 

Balance, being net cost of support, 

Average number of prisoners, . 
Cost for each prisoner : — 

Gross, 

Net, 



$31,224.89 
31,259.32 

$62,484.21 
660,878.38 

3,928 

$184.16 
168.25 



1910.1 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



715 



State F 


enal 


Institutions, 1909. 






Institutions. 


Expenses. 


Receipts. 


Net Cost. 


Weekly 

per Capita 

Cost. 


State Prison, .... 
Massachusetts Reformatory, 
Reformatory Prison for Women, 
Prison Camp and Hospital, 

State Farm, 

Lyman School for Boys, 

State Industrial School for Girls, 




S165.729.89 
227,883.72 
61,994.08 
40,997.13 
308,999.40 
103,897.73 
62,513.21 


$38,155.85 
23,682.96 
14,346.28 


$127,574.04 
204,200.76 
47,647.80 
40,997.13 
308,999.40 
103,897.73 
62,513.21 


_ 
$2.55 
4.88 
4.62 


Totals 


$972,015.16 


$76,185.09 


$895,830.07 


- 



Expenses of Penal Institutions. 



Institutions. 


Expense. 


Per 

Capita Expense 

Average. 


State institutions 

Jails and houses of correction, 


$895,830.07 
660,878.38 


$168.25 


Totals 


$1,556,708.45 


- 



The per capita cost of maintenance of the average prisoner in the 
State Prison, the Massachusetts reformatories at Concord and Sher- 
bom and the Prison Camp and Hospital has not been worked out by 
the Prison Commissioners; the per capita cost of those committed to 
the State Farm at Bridgewater and the schools for boys and girls at 
Westborough and Lancaster has been computed by the State Board of 
Charity, under whose jurisdiction these semi-penal, semi-industrial 
institutions are. 



716 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



1 

I 

■8 





00 


e» 


ci 


i-O 










s 










•s^ox 


"" 




CO 


i>r 


« 














CO 




t 


, 










•tijiion3[UfX aSy 
















i 


, 




CO 






•Bxed£ oi.' 9A °qv 










CO 






eo 


, 


t _ t 


«* 


o 


oo 


•MB9.X. 01 <>% T9 










CO 


o 




W5 


, 


MS 


00 


tH 


<M 


•areas. 09 o% TS 








« 


OS 


"3 

eo* 




i« 


, 


eo 


^ 


eo 


9 


•SIB9i OS °% If 


~~' 






oa 


g 












eo 


t~ 




"3 


eo 


kO 








•areas. Of o% xs 








OS 


oo 

oo" 


oo 

Oi 

a" 




CO 


<M 










•SIT39Jt OS <n 9Z 






lO 


CO 


CM 

eo 


8. 




CO 




05 


~* 


cq 


CN 


•s-^A SZ <n xz 










CO* 


eo 


•s^9A 0Z 


eo 


s 


W 


£ 


eo 
CO 


8 
•>* 






CO 


<* 








•areas. 6T 










co 1 


3 




CO 


CO 


ifl 


^ H 


^ 


o 


•areas. 8T 










<M 


•* 




CN 


r<-l 




W 




o 


■SXB9A ii 












CO 






Oi 


(M 




**< 


t~ 


•SIB8A 9T 




« 












, 


05 


, 


1 


t*. 


eo 


•area^ ST 
















_, 


1 


, 


1 


»o 


eo 


•areajt ?i 




















a 






















b 


§ 




a 
o 






3 


£ 




o 








u 




1 


§ 




n 


a 




o 


o 

S 




§ 






o 

s 


Ah 




4S 




§ • 




O 

.2 


! 


I 

a 


a 
1 


1 1 




03 


i 


•R 


8 


1 H 




43 


a 


i3 




01 





1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



717 



Habits of Prisoners, 1909. 



Habits. 


State 

Prison. 


Massa- 
chusetts 
Reform- 
atory. 


Reform- 
atory 
Prison 

for 
Women. 


State 
Farm. 


Jails and 
Houses 
of Cor- 
rection. 


Totals. 


Intemperate 

Temperate, .... 


81 
117 


221 
468 


202 
130 


3,295 


26,718 
996 


30,517 
1,711 


Totals 


198 


689 


332 


3,295 


27,714 


32,228 



Education of Prisoners committed during 1909. 



Education. 


State 
Prison. 


Massa- 
chusetts 
Reform- 
atory. 


Reform- 
atory 
Prison 
for 

Women. 


State 
Farm. 


Jails and 
Houses 
of Cor- 
rection. 


Totals. 


Read or write, .... 

Illiterate, 

Unknown 


181 
17 


620 
69 


302 
30 


3,068 

218 

9 


24,390 
3,323 

1 


28,561 

3,657 

10 


Totals 


198 


689 


332 


3,295 


27,714 


32,228 



Ages of Persons committed for Drunkenness to All the Penal Institutions 
during the Year ending September 30, 1909. 



AGES. 



16 years, 

17 years, 

18 years, 

19 years, 

20 years, 

21 to 25 years, 
26 to 30 years, 
31 to 40 years, 
41 to 50 years, 
51 to 60 years, 
61 to 70 years, 
Above 70 years, 
Age unknown, 

Totals, . 



<x> o 

■SB 



u 



H c o 

U O C9 
u m - 



.',1 



(MS 



State Farm. 



M. 



l 
4 
6 
9 

93 
217 
769 
806 
407 
136 
21 
3 



2,472 



234 



Tot. 



1 

4 

7 

9 

101 

251 

857 

865 

440 

146 

22 

3 



2,706 



Jails and 

Houses of 

Correction. 



M. 


F. 


2 


- 


10 


1 


44 


3 


73 


- 


93 


3 


1,368 


107 


2,051 


224 


5.S27 


702 


4,999 


441 


2,288 


146 


625 


B0 


100 


3 


17,481 


1,661 



Tot. 



2 

11 

47 

73 

96 

1,475 

2.275 

6,529 

5,440 

2,434 

655 

103 

2 



19,142 



Aggregates. 



M. 



2 

14 

49 

79 

109 

1,482 

2,278 

6,605 

5,805 

2,695 

761 

121 

4 



20,004 



F. Tot. 



1 

5 

2 

6 

134 

274 

823 

515 

183 

41 

5 

1 



2 

15 

54 

81 

115 

1,616 

2,552 

7,428 

6,320 

2,878 

802 

126 

5 



1,990 



21,994 



718 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Census of Insanity, 1909. 



Phase op Mental Deficiency. 


Male. 


Female. 


Totals. 


Insane, 


5,835 


6,217 


12,052 


Feeble-minded, 


1,026 


706 


1,732 


Epileptic, 


262 


202 


464 


Inebriates, 


96 


30 


126 


Totals, 


7,219 


7,155 


14,374 



Care of Insane, 1909. 





Insane. 


Feeble- 
minded. 


Epi- 
leptic. 

(Sane). 


Ine- 
briate. 


Totals. 


VOLTJNTAKY. 


LOCATION. 


Mental 

(not 
Insane). 


Other 

Classes. 


Public care, 
Institutions, 
Family care, 
Almshouses, 

Private care, ., 


11,731 
11,490 

241 

321 


1,674 
1,458 

216 
58 


461 
461 

3 


122 
122 

4 


13,988 

13,531 

241 

216 

386 


16 
16 

13 


21 
21 

53 


Total under care, 


12,052 


1,732 


464 


126 


14,374 


29 


74 



Summary of Expenses and Census of Inefficients, Criminals, Paupers, In- 
sane, etc., 1909. 





Persons. 


Expenses. 


Totals. 


Penal institutions: — 

State, 




S895.830.07 
660,878.38 
272,506.93 




















$1,829,215.38 


Pauperism and charity: — 

State and towns, 

Boston institutions, . 


85,806,188.00 
844,423.17 
22,266.00 

7,856,363.38 


Private charitable and quasi-charitable, . 




14,529,240.55 
2,642,083.62 


Insanity: — 

State institutions, 


$2,642,083.62 






Classes of inmates: — 

Prisoners 

Paupers, 

Vagrants, . 

Insane, 


32,228 
47,231 
32,798 
14,374 


- 




Totals 


126,631 


- 


$19,000,539.55 



Note. — The statistics of insanity give expenditures for 1908 and census of inmates for 1909. 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



719 



M 



CO 



•5 





+j 








a 


00 


o 




0> 


CN 


o 




O 




o 




u 




o 




3 








Pn 






us 
















o> 


















h 




o 




01 




OO 




-Q 


00 


CO 




a 


CO 


CO 




<M 


o 




•«*< 


o 




fe 




CO 




■♦a 








d 
.9 


eo 


§ 




O 


CO 


§ 




a> 








Ah 






us 








a» 








eo 


















(h* 


tM 


eo 




<D 


co 


CO 




.Q 


CO 






a 


«o 


o 




s 


CO 


o 






iO 




fe 




CN 






aT 








> 








o 








.O 








03 








T3 








a 








d 








© 








lO 
















o 








03 








«i 








o 








C8 
















a 
















O 








<0 








*0 
















i 


a 






3 


O 






o 


'43 






a 


OS 






_o 


"3 








a 






_oj 
3 


a 






a 


i 






& 


oJ 






3 








K 





720 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



M 





_^ 


































c 


o 


o 


















a 


o 










o 


o 


«-] 


















■^< 












s 


_ 










' 


' 




' 


t^. 


DC 


' 


• 








SM 




















CN 










4) 
































m 


* 
































© 


































































<s 


































'- , 




o 


■* 


CO 


>Q 


t^ 


EQ 


,H 


el 


t^ 


Iffl 


o 


o 


i^ 


ee 


i 






CN 


DC 


O 






CO 


© 


CM 




•^ 


6N 


eo 


DC 






CO 


00 


eo 


io 


O0 


eo 


o 


CM 




C: 


5N 


i>- 


r- 


ee 


ee 








































s 


eo" 


ec 


1 


w 


C- 




X 


CM 


eo 




cc 


00 


is 


6N 






o 




w 


CM 




CO 








es 


C5 




DC 






< 


CNI_ 


© 


















~ > 


2 


5 








^ 


































c 


8 


o 


















o 


o 






o 




0) 

D 


•<*< 


















o 


eo 






CO 




8 


eo 


















DC 

eo 


re 






"« 




© 


































fc 
































1A 


































es 


































































eo 




































es 


c: 


^ 


CM 


eo 




ia 


o 


CN 


~ 




05 


UO 


t^ 


o 








lO 


*a 


lO 


CC 




OS 


CM 


t>- 


J~- 


c. 




O 


Cvl 


o 




to 




ec 


c 






ex 


«o 


:C 


eo_ 




c; 


^ 






o 




£ 


































r- 


cq 


o 




ec 




© 


ua 


=~r 




o 


= 


es 




CO 




o 




a 


so 


^ 






re 


es 






eo 


6N 




o 


O 




«< 


oo 


c-. 


CC 
















■* 


eo 


-" 


CN 






• 


































© 


o 
o 




















O 

o 


s 










o 


"* 




' 


' 


' 


' 


' 


' 


' 


eo 


o 


' 


' 


' 






o 


CM 


















eo 












£ 


, " H 
































































1 






































































C5 


= 


,_, 


c 


N 


,+, 


ex 


CM 


CN 


DO 


(M 


l> 


_ 


eo 


1 






(M 


'-= 


CM 




SO 


es 


es 


— 


re 


CO 


s 


eo 




CM 






CO 


•* 




»© 


M 


00 


r^ 


i> 


~ 


oq 


SO 


lO 


eo 


t- 


es 






£ 


































oo 


05 


re 


t» 


O0 




eo 


= 


CO 




es 


es 


C5 


es 






© 


OS 


re 


CM 


r^ 






<M 


^ 






X 


eo 


IO 


o 






«! 


CO 

eo 


— 


5C 
















eo 


iO 


OJ_ 


eo 






^ 


































c 


































© 


































O 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 




h 


































© 


































CU 


































































































eo 




































to 

© 

< 


o 
eo 

eo 

o 
eo 


es 


1 


1 








1 






Ol 

o 
o 

C2 


LO 

es 






1 




J 


































"5 


































0) 


































D 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 




(-C 


































© 


































fin 
































us 


































s 


































1 " 


i 


CS 


CM 


' 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


J 


eo 




1 


1 


1 




tO 




















~~ 


>* 










u 


eo 


DC 




















ee 










< 


CM 

eo" 


00 


















O 


CO 










A 










































ft 
O 


co" 

c 

© 








DO 


CD 

a 






CO 


> 








3 

o 


> 


i 


O 

.2* 


M 
© 

s 


CO 

.2 

'E 

c 


CO 

eS 

-= 
g 

o 


00 

CC 




>> 

— 

eo 

cS 

I* 

o 


-p 
el 

M 
% 


— " 

c 
§ 


no 

» 

"= 
o 

a 


n 

03 

ft 

= 
0> 

a 
| 


a 
e, 
E 
'3 

3 

3 


T3 

'35 

M 

"3 






H 


O 


















^ 


- 


fi 





P 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



721 





_^ 
































G 


s 


o 


o 


o 




o 


3 


CO 


3 




3 






3 




o 


■*f 




CO 






CO 


3 


s 


BO 


3 


. 


. 


US 




3 


T** 


3 


cn 




t^ 


_ 


U0 


3 


^H 


,-i 






CO 






O 




CO 


























o 
































ftl 






























i 






























































»H 




to 












cn 


cN 


3 


3 


■*! 


»o 


3 


3 






3 


T»< 


CO 


to 


o 


CO 


3 


U0 


= 


eo 






CO 


8 




6 




K 


iO 


CO 






CN 


lO 






3 


CN 


3 


































9 


o 


o 


t^. 


cn 


CO 


CN 


00 


t^. 




3 


T*< 




00 


3 




"3 




or 




— 


■ O 


lO 


cn 


UO 


OS 


lO 


"0 




3 


00 






<M 




o 


00 


CO 


OS 


co 


00 


3 


3 


■«f< 


CN 


3 




> 
































CO 


CO 


CN 


cn 




no 




■«*< 


CO 




00 






Ci 






r^ 




CN 




























•e 






























_^ 
































c 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


3 


3 


3 










3 




01 

o 


o 


cc 


t~ 


CO 




co 




-*f< 


3 




^ 






3 




o 


Tt< 


o 


CO 




r--. 


CN 


WS 


ro 


CN 


CM 






CO 






o 




CO 












C<l 














V 
































Ch 






























in 
































a* 
































00 
































T-t 






CO 


3 


o 


t« 


O0 


00 


U0 


3 




?<~> 


t~- 


3 


3 






CO 








cn 




r- 


00 


-. 




eo 


00 


3 


3 




d 




*°» 


o 


©_ 


CXI 


CO 


«5 


lO 


~ 


■*! 


«5 




3 


J-~ 


































3 


o 


-f 


•^ 


oT 


t^ 




•<* 


3 




00 


3 


3 


CN 


3 






00 


CO 


co 




3 


1^ 


3 


U0 


3 


— 


00 




00 


CO 




C3 


CO 


■* 


CN 


t^ 




00 




CO 


<* 


3 




• o 




OO 




> 




































EC 










CN 


c<T 




CO 






CO 






s 




























































^ 
































3 


o 


o 


o 


o 




o 


3 


3 


3 


3 


3 










O 


o 




Tt< 








3 


3 


•^t 


t^ 


3 










o 


3 


tvi 


,-j 




Tf< 


co 


"O 


Tfi 


-*i 


_i 












o 




CN 












CN| 














<u 






























• 


pm 






























irt 
































Dp 
































00 




































CO 


•^ 


CO 


CO 


CO 


o 


>o 


-* 


3 


00 




t^ 


3 


3 








-« 


CN 




so 


3 


« 


c 


t^ 


■* 


OS 


co 


CO 


3 




6 


o 




IC 


00 


3 


r^ 




O0 


l^ 


t^ 




m 




3 


































3 


co 


CO 


o" 


CO 


CO 




>o 


3 










00 








lO 




X 


00 




CN 


U5 


00 


CO 


«5 


CN 


CO 


CO 






rt 


1-- 


CN 


o 


CO 




CN 


00_ 


S 


CO 


CN 


CN 


3 




o_ 




> 
































t^ 


CO 


CO 






CN 




CN 




ei 


in 












•<f 
































«* 






























^ 
































C 
































CD 
































o 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 


1 




































o 
































Ph 






























IQ 






























































oo 


6 


1 

co 
© 

CO 




>o 
cn 
in 

UO 

00 




1 


CO 
CO 














1 


1 




























































-2" 




























































o 






























js 






























_o 
























































































































a; 






























o 


OQ 




























3 


H 




























~C 


U 




























s3 


P 




















« 








cc 


2 




















F 








til 























C3 








CC 




























o 






















a 








> 










X 


-3 
a 






•fl 




o 

-3 








cc 






-. 




u 

r 

o 
ft 

I 

g 

= 


J3 
O 


if 




c 


^ 


12 






g 


1 




2 


3 

o 

EL 


oi* 

a 

£ 

a 


a 

o 
CO 

g 


u 

3 
— 
o 

& 
>. 


eg 



08 

03 

o 


.2 

CO 


o 

d 

CO 


o" 

— 


co 

~ 
c 

ft 

T3 


•3 
O 

c. 

3 


C 

O 
O 






1 


'3 





o 


o 


3 


3 

fa 


tS 


IS 


s 


O 

c 

fa 



722 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 





o 


a 


a 
















1 












o 


x 


s 


a 


- 




a 

a 


a 




a 


R 




r; 


o 


US 

e 

Cf> 




































CO 












so 


















DO 






— 
























r- 






CO 


<M 




>o 


"5 


l© 


BC 


~ 




t~ 




CM 


X 






























































o 


o 
























s 






8 


:r 


8 


§ 


— 


c 


5 


a 
o 


a 
a 


a 
a 


o 
a 


a 
a 


a 
a 


o 
o 


s 


oc 


s 


CO 


N 


o 


CO 


OS 


~ 


CI 


so 




CM 


a 
































lO 


t- 


x 














cm 


CM 


CO 


X 


CM 


CO 




































a& 
































o 


c 


a 


a 


a 


o 


a 


c 


o 


s 


s 


s 


o 


a 


8 




o 


a 


a 


a 


a 


o 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


— 


o 


































00 

00 
















t^ 










3 






CO 




t~ 


1~~ 


CD 


f- 












CO 


CO 




t~ 


CO 




cn 






«o 










CM 


oa 




CM 


































































€© 




























































o 




















o 












g 






o 


a 


_ 


_ 


c 


— 


o 


a 




a 


a 




cr 


c- 




OS 


— 


— , 


CM 


»o 


b- 


CM 


DO 


_ 


co 


CM 


oo 


re 


o 


































<m 


cm 


x 


CM 


cm 


CO 


CM 




CO 






DO 


a 

cm" 
























~ 








— 


s 




























- 








o 




a 


O 


c 


a 


a 


a 


a 


— 




a 


C 


















































L~ 




























>c 


CV 




CM 










OS 










CM 


X 




CO 














CM 


IC 








«» 


" 






















" 














o 
























































o 


a 


a 


a 


a 


O 


— 
































































»o 




















t^ 




-M 


to 


BO 


CM 


M 




















c© 




X 

cnT 


w 


»© 


~ 




















00 
































B 
































p 
































a 
































o 


































































































<x> 

St 

-3 












JQ 


BB 

© 














c 




c 
3 

2 
o 


i 


'3 


c 


© 
>> 


J 

o. 


F-l 
© 

S3 

o 


U 

u 


© 

o 


Ft 

_© 



O 


©" 

- 

2 


a 

.2 
'5 
3 


so 
© 
o 


c 

"5 

s 

o 


d 

8 




1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



723 







^ 


b» 




-r 


uo 


CO 






o 


o 


sc 




CO 






d 


00 


© 






o 


CO 


















3 


CD 


CO 


OS 


t^ 


[^ 


lO 




3 


o 


CO 


CO 


ao 








CO 




"3 


CO 




>c 




> 


•» 










CD 


m 
















o 
en 
















































1* 


t^ 


CO 


o> 


OS 


"5 


•*f 




CD 




DO 


•<f 




CO 


't' 




00 


eg 


CO 


o» 


t^ 


O0 


















£ 


oo 


CO 




CO 




CO 




00 


^i 


C5 


>o 




CO 




3 






•* 










£ 






CO 












lO 


o 


CO 


U0 


t- 


CO 










OS 


— 


o 


■<* 




a3 


CO 


CO 


"5 




I- 


CO 




















3 


CO 


Ol 


O 


l> 


co 


CO 






CI 






•>* 


o 


oo 




c3 


o 




o 


CO 


CO 


o 




> 


CO 










u£ 


ui 
















s 






























«H 


















J2 


CM 


00 


oc 


o 


a> 


OS 




O 


-r 


X 


bo 


CO 






W 


°i. 


lO 


co_ 


*^ 


U5 




s 






co" 


CO 


CO 






CO 


T»< 




CO 




t^ 




3 






00 










Z 






'- , 






1 






o 


t>« 


00 


lO 




, 






CO 


"5 


CO 




t- 






aj 




lO 


00 


OJ 


oo 






















3 


CO 


r~ 


o> 


30 


o 






"3 


W 


O 


IC 


IQ 










CM 


C5 










> 














1A 
















00 
































»H 


















9 

J2 




O 


t~ 


O 


CO 


1 




rt( 






■*}< 








CO 


•"J, 


oo 


t- 


**. 






£ 


co~ 


lO 


o 


»© 


o 






CO 


>o 


US 


CO 








3 






lr~ 










fe 






^ 












CO 


r ^ 




>o 


••* 


1 






CO 






C3 


o 


so 




<D 




CO 


CO 


Oi 


CO 


■* 


















3 




^£ 


lO 




>a 


UO 




"S 


lO 






CM 




o 




O 


CO 


»o 




co_ 


00 




> 


CO 










«ri" 


lO 
















t— 
















00 






























r-i 


















lj 


^ 


o 


T*< 


lt$ 


X) 


00 






CO 


l> 


X 


HO 


o 






o_ 


t~ 


: - 


CO 


CO 


CO 


















£ 


CO 


oo 




CO 


CO 


CO 






U3 




•»* 




l« 




3 






© 










£ 






*" H 








! 


0Q 
















J 
















<J 
















a 
















1— 1 
















2 
















<J 


on 

o 




p 



"3 












u 


. 


3 






en 






o 


- 

1 


00 

a 


\ 


a 

X 

O 


o 






s 


OT 


~ 


K 


K 



724 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Table 1 shows the total population and the rural population. The 
figures indicate not only a percentage, but an actual decline in rural 
population; but in estimating the significance of these figures it must 
be remembered that towns which are really rural have been in many 
cases growing in population, and that this growth has carried quite 
a number of them above the 5,000 limit. The figures do not, therefore, 
indicate necessarily an actual decrease in the number engaged in agri- 
culture. 

Table 2 shows the total area of the State and the number of acres 
used for the different leading purposes. The fact that the last census 
gives the total number of acres in the State as materially larger than 
any previous census serves to make comparisons difficult. The figures 
indicate that the number of acres devoted to our most important crops 
has not changed very materially. There has been some decline in area 
in the case of the great staple cultivated crops, but this has been more 
than offset by an increase in the area devoted to hay, which has be- 
come increasingly profitable with our growth in population. No doubt 
the increasing difficulty of obtaining satisfactory labor has also tended 
to increase the area devoted to hay, since the production of this crop 
involves less labor than is required for most other crops. The increase 
in the area devoted to woodland is apparently quite striking; but a 
study of the statistics indicates that this increase must be in considera- 
ble measure due to a transfer from the classes known as " uncultivated," 
" permanent pasture " and " other unimproved." This transfer, how- 
ever, no doubt accords with the facts. Lands formerly included in 
these classes have undoubtedly come up to forest to a considerable 
extent during the past thirty to forty years. It should be noted that 
the figures in this table indicate that there has been no material change 
in the total area classed as " cultivated." 

Table 3 shows conclusively the correctness of the conclusion that 
the aggregate value of agricultural products in this State has tended 
to increase. In estimating the significance of the figures some allow- 
ance should doubtless be made for the fact that the census of 1905 
was probably taken with greater care than previous censuses. It must 
be remembered, further, that the figures in each case refer to a single 
selected year, and that it is of course possible that these figures may 
not be fairly representative of the average over a term of years. Still, 
the increase in value has apparently continued since 1875, and while 
the table may not give the amount of the increase quite correctly, the 
fact is apparent that the value of our agricultural products tends to 
grow from year to year, and in much greater proportion than the area 
used in producing them. 

Table 4 shows substantial increases in the case of all products except 
the cereal grains. These show decreases. Special attention, however, 
is to be called to the fact that the figures for maize for 1895 and 1905 
may be very misleading. The fact is that in about 1880 the practice 



1910.] HOUSE — No. 1750. 725 

of using maize for ensilage was introduced. This was adopted with 
increasing rapidity as the years went by, and at the present time, 
while it is not possible to give accurate figures, there is no doubt 
that at least one-half of the maize produced in Massachusetts is put 
into the silo. This has inevitably meant a decline in the number of 
bushels of grain husked. The census figures cover only the latter. 
Ensilage corn includes grain, and were it allowed to ripen, the total 
product of grain at the present time would undoubtedly be nearly as 
great as at any period subsequent to LS65. There has undoubtedly been 
a great decline in the number of bushels of oats and rye, but this is 
because other products have been found more profitable. 

Table 5 shows that there have been large increases in the value of 
milch cows and hens and chickens. Sheep raising has declined. There 
has been no great change in the number of hogs kept, while the actual 
value is about as great as at any earlier period covered by the census 
figures. There has been a great decline in the number of oxen kept. 
This is chiefly because of the increasing use of horses for farm work, 
although the fact that beef production has been less profitable than 
was formerly the case has also contributed to the result. 



726 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



^ V 











ZQ 


o 




> 


3 
© 






3 

pq 










o 


£ 


>H 


e 


■5 


P-i 


=0 


CD 

'3 


P 


<43 


i-> 


Ul 




CD 

© 


% 

W 


1 




% 


OS 


d 



o 

i— i *?= 

02 -S 



GQ 







cm 




o 




o 




OS 






CM 




O 




2°° 








CN 


co 


t~ 




t^ 


<M 








© © 














CM 












CO 




OS 


fC 


^ 










CM 


CM 






























© © 




OS 


CM 
















CM 




PndS 


























t* 


«tf 


t~ 


O 


00 


o 


3 


OS 

OS 


OS 


o 


co 












CM 


CM 


CO 


CO 






CO 




























CM 


© 




e> 


en 




















CO 


cm" 


























































o 

PM 




















r- 


ITS 






lO 


C2 


t-~ 




OS 




OS 


co 








l« 






■S* 






























CM 




CO 


vr$ 




co 


CM 


OS 


x* 


o 
































SS 


00 


CO 


OS 




CM 




co 


CM 






CO 




































CM 








CD 




CM 


CO 


t-- 






#8 




























CM 


as 








CM 


c-o 


§ 


o 
















l> 


CM 


!>. 


CO 


CO 




















CM 








CO 




co 






CO 


CM 


CO 




t^ 




s 


o 


CM 




s 


■* 






JS 






























o 






t^ 






CO 
































22 


d"2 
































CM 














CM 














t>. 










© 




CM 






PmS 






















































lO 




U2 




f- 




CM 


CM 


CD 


^H 


00 


















CO 


CO 


CO 












i^ 


t- 


o 






00 




t^ 


"* 


CM 






































-3 th .. 


CM 


CM 


00 


co 


CO 


>* 


cm 


th 




«# 


OS 
































§g 


O 


OS 










CM 














CO 


OS 


CM 




OS 


OS 




CO 


CM 




kO 
































£g 




























OS 




CO 












lr~ 


CO 


OS 






LO 


OS 




CO 


CO 






CO 






















CO 


CO 


co 












BQ 




























W 




























o 




























3 






























© 

a 

CD 
O 
© 


© 

a 
% 

o 


CD 

o 

o 


© 

a 

CD 

a 
© 


CO 

d 

bl) 


1-5 


© 
d 

•-3 




a 

< 


o 

c3 


>> 

ci 
3 

1 


h 

c3 

d 
d 

£ 1 



1910.] 



HOUSE'— No. 1750. 



727 



t 



I 



•I 



I 



3 







os 


_ 


lO 


CM 


00 




r~ 


CO 


->*< 


@ 


t^ 


o 






CM 


CM 


«5 




CM 


CM 




r- 


t~ 


CO 






0. 




CO 


©„ 


o 


1^ 




co 


CM 




00 


00 


CM 






























o 


a 


© 


co" 


■* 


CO 


00 


O 




CM 




CO 


CM 




e> 




CM 








co 


^ 


OO 


ui 




o 




-C 


CO 


OS 


os 


CM 


o 




CO 


CO 


o 




CO 


co 




zn 




























■<*< 




Tt< 




»o 




« 




lO 




" 








CM 


CO 


CM 


OO 


OS 


CM 


T* 


t^ 




CO 


r>- 


CM 






■fl 


OS 


CO 


ift 


CO 


OS 






OO 


HO 


CN« 






CO 




OS 


CM 


t-- 




OS 


o 




CO 


CO 


>o 


C 


< 


























bO 


00 


s 


OO 


Os 


W 




ui" 






OS 


CO 


CO 


O 




CO 


CO 


CO 




t- 


CO 


m 


CM 


CM 


CM 


a 


w 




CO 


CO 


00 




t^ 


»o 




CO 


o 


r-_ 


CO 


X 


























«o 


" 


CO 


,H 


"0 


*■• 


tj< 


* H 


"* 


CM 


■*" 


—' 


DO 




























H 






















































£ 




























a 




»o 


CO 


CO 


CM 


oo 


t^ 


CM 


"5 




-<*< 


i-~ 


co 


a 


CO 




^ 


lO 




CO 


CO 


OS 






CO 






CO 


«o 


o 


CO 


CO 


00 


CO 


CO 


©_ 


OS 


oo 


■^ 
































©s 


os 


CM 




lO 


s 




CO 






CO 


CO 


s 




CO 


CM 




CO 


CM 








CM 


^- 


CM 


GO 


eg 

o 


CO 




CO 




CO 




CM 




CM 












CO 


OS 


CO 


CO 


■*t< 


* 




00 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CM 






co 


r-- 


lO 


CO 


OS 


f^ 


CM 


OS 








CO 




CD 


CM 


CO 


CM 


co 


CO 


o 


OS 


OS 




CM 


CO 


eo 


































00 


f~ 


o 


lO 


■«*< 


CM 




CM 


00 


o 


CM 


CO 






CM 


CO 


CM 


U0 


CO 


lO 


OS 


«5 


«0 




OS 






& 


r^ 


CM 


CO 




00 


«CH 


CO 


co 








eo 




o 




























■* 








■fl 




















CO 




00 


OS 


00 


U0 




OS 


lO 


00 


o 


o 






u; 


t~ 


t^ 


00 






CM 


■"*! 


00 


lO 




CO 




d 


00 




CO 


00 


00 




OO 




oo 


US 


t^ 


CO 






























IB 






CM 




CM 


00 


OO 


tfi 




CO 


00 


•^ 




V 


CO 


-* 


CM 


lO 


25 




co 


© 


co 




00 


c 




J3 


•<* 




00 


co 


o 


CM 


00 


oo 


«s 


t^ 


CM 


m 
































CO 


CM 


•*< 


~ 


rt< 


2 


" 


CM 


-* 


CM 


" 


3 


" 






CM 


t-- 


OS 


^ 


CO 


CO 


U5 


»o 








CO 






"«< 


-<1< 


CO 


CM 


CO 


o 


CM 


oo 




CM 


CO 


CO 




co 




CO 








OS 


O0 




OS 


kO 


CO 
































fed 




CO 


CO" 


o 


CM 


m 


CO 


CO" 


OS 


o 


vi 


00 




O 


OS 




00 


co 










«5 


CM 








w 


00 


o 




CO 






o 


O0 


co_ 


CO 


CO 


t^ 






























CO 


t^i 


OS 


00 


t-»~ 




a 






00 


CO 


l^ 






CM 




CM 




CM 






CM 




CM 




Q 




























■«! 




CO 


CM 










OS 


OS 


CM 


ia 


"0 


OS 


a 








OS 


t~ 




CO 


lO 




OS 


CO 


"5 


OS 


CO 


oo 


CO 


CM 


co 


o 


OS 


CO 


CM 


CM 


00 






w 


CD 




























CM 










o 


CO 


00 


o 


CO 


t^ 








OO 


CM 




CM 


CO 




CO 


oo 


b- 


CO 


to 


"3 


CO 


•"Cf 


•"i 


■<* 


CM 


■* 


»"i 


"* 


OS 




CO 


CM 




o 


1-1 




• h 




- 1 




rt 






































3 




























o 






















































H 




























Ph 




«5 


«c 


co 


CO 


CO 


■<*< 


00 


o 


o 


OS 




lO 




CM 


o 




o 


OS 




co 


lO 


00 


CO 


t~ 


OO 




ji 


"5 


oo 


CO 


CM 


CO 


CO 


t-~ 


CM 


CO 


** 


CM 




































CO 


OS 


t^ 


OS 


OS 


«o 


CO 


OS 


OS 


o 


OS 


OS 




-►2 


00 




CO 


CO 


OO 


o 




CM 






CO 


lO 




c3 




OS 


t^ 


o 


CO 


CO 


o 


CO 


OS 


"* 


CO 


CM 




o 






























CM 


o 


CO 




CO 




CO 


© 


CO 


o 


CO 


































co 


d 




o* 




d 




d 




d 


to 


d 






.2 


1° 


.2 


US) 


.2 


M 


.2 


60 


.2 


bfi 


.2 


-' 






+3 




CO 




C5 




















.2 




.2 




.2 




V 




_o 




o 






'3 




o 




o 




a 




o 




t) 










O 




O 




13 

O 


■* 


15 

o 


<* 


o 




o 




co 




























tf 




























«J 




























H 




























^ 


cs 

- 

CS 




CO 
OS 




os 




—. 




J2 




s 

OS 





728 



COST OF* LIVING. 



[May 



Receipts of Live Stock at Principal Eastern Cities, 1905-09. ■ 

[Compiled from Monthly Summary of Commerce and Finance, United States Bureau of Sta- 
tistics.] 



Years. 


Live Stock. 


Boston, 

52 Weeks, 
December 28. 


New York, 

52 Weeks, 

December 28. 


Philadelphia, 

52 Weeks, 
December 28. 


Baltimore, 
12 Months. 




Hogs, .... 


1,241,366 


1,734,803 


225,126 


835,806 




Calves, 


122,152 


433,674 


64,298 


24,779 


1909, . 


Cattle, 


194,224 


602,231 


192,042 


151,673 




Sheep, 

Totals, 


353,309 


2,200,041 


490,924 


374,300 




1,911,051 


4,970,749 


972,390 


1,386,558 




Hogs, .... 


1,479,724 


2,017,434 


228,581 


1,023,730 




Calves, 


132,539 


407,497 


39,911 


25,043 


1908, . 


Cattle, 


193,406 


596,669 


191,764 


162,890 




Sheep, 
Totals, 


352,456 


2,178,229 


438,585 


380,070 




2,158,125 


5,199,829 


898,841 


1,591,733 




Hogs, .... 


12 Months. 
1,116,114 


1,872,836 


52 Weeks, 
July 2. 
198,805 


882,605 




Calves, 


148,956 


387,865 


- 


27,493 


1907, . 


Cattle, 


214,169 


633,674 


178,142 


196,781 




Sheep, 
Totals, 


367,580 


1,759,573 


386,332 


411,458 




1,846,819 


4,653,948 


763,279 


1,518,337 




Hogs, .... 


1,205,535 


52 Weeks, 

December 3. 

1,713,160 


52 Weeks, 
December 28. 
173,400 


785,776 




Calves, 


153,523 


355,646 


- 


26,123 


1906, . 


Cattle, 


194,449 


580,945 


168,184 


180,806 




Sheep, 
Totals, 


345,511 


1,542,716 


419,385 


326,013 


1 


1,899,018 


4,192,467 


760,969 


1,318,718 




Hogs, .... 


1,224,392 


52 Weeks, 

December 31. 

1,807,159 


52 Weeks, 
December 29. 
161,404 


849,872 




Calves, 


135,688 


346,483 


- 


24,960 


1905, . 


Cattle, 


213,566 


590,896 


146,961 


169,723 




Sheep, 
Totals, 


328,560 


1,380,489 


375,178 


342,314 




1,902,206 


4,125,027 


683,543 


1,386,869 



1910." 



HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 



729 



Exports of Animals from the United States, 1907-09. 

[Compiled from Monthly Summary of Commerce and Finance, United States Bureau of Sta- 
tistics.] 



ANIMALS. 


1907. 


1908. 


1909. 


Number. Value. 

1 


Number. Value. Number. : Value. 


Cattle, 

Hogs 

Sheep, 


401,583 
23,783 
121,197 


§33,796,425 
304,464 
707,930 


277,036 
29,005 
100,644 


$24,034,193 
256,928 
600,792 


184,957 
11,886 
54,613 


$16,274,250 

76,515 

265,356 




546,463 


$34,808,819 


406,785 


$24,891,913 


251,456 


$16,616,121 



Exports of Meat and Dairy Products from the United States, 1907-09. 

[Compiled from Monthly Summary of Commerce and Finance, United States Bureau of Sta- 
tistics.] 



1907. 



1908. 



1909. 



Quantitv ,- , .„ 
(Pounds). ^ alue - 



Beef, canned, 

Beef, fresh, . 

Bacon, .... 

Hams and shoulder, cured, 

Pork, pickled, 

Lard 

Oleo and oleomargarine, 

Butter 

Cheese. 



22,145,993 
269,411,737 
208,085,974 



$2,352,226 
26,182,787 
22,344,365 



8SSSS". ™- 



17,455,069 $1,884,940 
156,133,985 15,952,670 
264,788,376 27,829,273 



Quantity 
(Pounds). 



16,647,712 
93,742,451 
212,551,671 



Value. 



$1,843,205 

9,592,176 

23,318,162 



207,069,318 24,213,548 220,829,141 24,444,747 

165,277,566 15,465,072 100,337,425 8,630,497 

589,268,230 55,518,079 581,934,236 53,659,222 

207,639,397^ 18,683,758/ 197,953,343 19,416,702 

3,857,288 i 862,812'! 8,918,091 1.884,254 

10,341,335' 1,260,480' 10,190,843 1,270,557 



195,765,704 21,937,171 

I 
46,743,915 4,494,038 

458,261,434 48.770,370 

164,377,905 17,750,059 

2,925,730; 699,460 

3,501,214 486,855 



Eastward Trunk-line Movement of Flour, Grain and Provisions from 
Chicago and Chicago Junction Points, 1903-09. 

[Compiled from Summary of Commerce and Finance. United States Bureau of Statistics.] 



YEAR: 



Flour 
(Barrels). 



Grain 
(Bushels). 



Provisions. 



Tons. 



Weekly 
Average. 



1909 


5.215,854 


142.404,000 


942,376 


18,123 


190S, 


5.891,864 


144.416,000 


1,136,225 


21,438 


1907, 


5,942.934 


130.046,000 


1,176,266 


22,621 


1906 


5.431.941 


114,062,000 


1.353,610 


26,031 


1905 


4,961,858 


112,220,000 


1,460,423 


28,085 


1904 


6,525,332 


90,501,000 


1,306,936 


25,133 


1903 


4.563.786 


79,729.000 


1,406.525 


27.049 



730 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May ; 



Eastward Trunk-line Movement, by Months, of Provisions from Chicago 
and Chicago Junction Points, 1906-10. 

[Compiled from Monthly Summary of Commerce and Finance, "United States Bureau of Sta- 
tistics.] 



Months. 


1906. 


1907. 


1908. 


1909. 


1910. 


January, 


Tons. 
114,060 


Tons. 
93,765 


Tods. 
94,089 


Tons. 
81,939 


Tons. 
72,600 


February, 








111,687 


98,733 


99,842 


68,252 


73,740 


March, 










127,708 


1 OS, 264 


109,891 


80,390 


- 


April, . 










110,640 


88,591 


70,281 


65,953 


- 


May, . 










156,126 


80,961 


74,233 


74,572 


- 


June, . 










130,460 


106,880 


102,559 


86,572 


- 


July, . 










89,036 


94,466 


78,820 


74,773 


- 


August, 










114,309 


93,907 


76,467 


75,055 


- 


September, 










100,941 


121,412 


123,085 


96,590 


- 


October, 










103,137 


103,943 


94,366 


83,261 


- 


November, 










99,659 


82,377 


85,233 


60,236 


- 


December, 










95,847 


99,708 


109,062 


94,893 


- 


52 weeks, 


1,353,610 


1,173,007 


1,117,928 


942,376 


- 


Weekly average, 








26,031 


22,558 


21,499 


18,123 


- 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



731 



Appendix Iv. 



MARKET STATISTICS. 



Receipts of Live Stock at Boston (Watertown and Brighton Yards), 1890- 

1908. 

[Reported by Boston Chamber of Commerce.] 



Yeahs. 



Cattle. 



Sheep. 



Calves. 



Fat Hogs. 



1908, 
1907, 
1906, 
1905, 
1904, 
1903, 
1902, 
1901, 
1900, 



1897, 
1896, 
1895, 
1894, 
1893, 
1892, 
1891, 
1890, 



189,731 
243,705 
227,455 
211,703 
201,588 
89,076 
160,382 
181,096 
177,951 
188,539 
192,853 
229,167 
225,854 
168,461 
182,276 
151,188 
188,953 
161,167 
167,974 



350,560 
343,107 
324,808 
312,997 
528,173 
425,931 
479,237 
451,206 
387,427 
379,615 
493,508 
558,795 
666,451 
782,735 
688,334 
530,064 
571,980 
585,709 
583,545 



129,375 
139,019 
106,602 
107,207 
105,278 
81,622 
104,872 
97,473 
93,210 
91,769 
79,619 
92,261 
82,477 
75,427 
73,996 
80,315 
80,495 
77,084 
74,234 



1,422,097 
1,246,818 
1,265,566 
1,281,419 
1,421,003 
1,214,596 
1,418,920 
1,400,956 
1,275,129 
1,680,834 
1,489,483 
1,421,261 
1,421,503 
1,397,302 
1,664,671 
1,379,517 
1,668,556 
1,465,099 
1,312,971 



732 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Live Stock inspected at Brighton Abattoir, 1899-1909. 

[Reported by Boston Board of Health.] 









m 

a) 

w 


Eastern. 


Western. 


> 

o 
H 


03 
> 

o 




a 

m 


B 


YEARS. 




03 

o 

O 


13 
pq 


xh 

o 
O 


4 

6 


1909, . 


7,651 


1,023 


9,762 


- 


7,660 


26,096 


22,291 


1,803 


54,270 


104,460 


1908, 






5,844 


1,087 


14,015 


- 


15,906 


36,852 


17,661 


1,784 


50,349 


106,646 


1907, 






7,065 


917 


10,210 


- 


22,385 


40,577 


10,742 


1,186 


32,967 


85,472 


1906, 






8,917 


1,430 


8,473 


- 


11,456 


30,276 


16,943 


1,898 


25,963 


75,080 


1905, 






8,769 


1,810 


6,782 


- 


12,902 


30,263 


11,876 


2,561 


22,910 


67,610 


1904, 






11,656 


1,698 


7,566 


- 


7,844 


28,764 


13,971 


12,726 


18,992 


74,453 


1903, 






14,041 


1,033 


6,302 


- 


6,766 


28,142 


15,005 


13,911 


10,206 


67,264 


1902, 






10,663 


1,754 


7,434 


45 


7,722 


27,618 


22,675 


17,077 


3,025 


70,395 


1901, 






12,077 


1,713 


7,378 


25 


2,982 


24,175 


16,162 


36,083 


495 


76,915 


1900, 






13,532 


1,706 


6,967 


60 


431 


22,692 


22,015 


14,891 


26 


59,624 


1899, 






11,661 


918 


3,945 


358 


1,347 


18,229 


21,506 


15,048 


47 


54,830 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



733 



5 



S « 



^ 





If 


^ H 


CO 


CO 


t^ 


00 


fH 


^^ 


o 


o 




o 


t» 


CO 


00 


s 


CM 


IO 


IO 


CO 




00 


00 


t^ 


co 




CM 


CM_ 




£ 


Ct 


o 


© 


cm 


CO 


C5 


o 


r~T 


IO 


cm 


CO 


t~ 


N 


C5 


IS 


2 


X 


CO 


z 


on 








* H 


1-1 




CM 




'-' 
























feT3 
IS 


© 


IO 


fr. 


r» 


■<* 


_ 


_ 


t--. 


_ 





IO 


CO 






r--. 


00 


O 


Tf< 




oq 


CO 


CO 


>— i 


•^ 


00 




CO 


t^-_ 


so 


f-T 


■^ 


o 




"5 




t^r 


t--" 


CO 




— 


x 


c 






s 


Ci 




t^ 






~*1 


— - 


t^ 


t~ 




IO 








■*" 


cnT 








CO 










CO 


co 


,_, 


io 


o 


t^ 


U5 


IO 


t^. 






O0 


t^ 




en 






EC 


IO 


CO 




as 


l> 


io 


lO 




00 






IO 


CO 
























co 




c: 


US 


CM 




CO 


o 


CO 




co 


C2 


= 


O 


CM 


co 


US 




O0 




■** 


io 


r- 


co_ 


»"* 


•■* 


C3 


CD 


o 




















































O 


"3 


«5 




t~ 




00 








CO 






= 




o 


00 






o 






oo 


X 




EN 


o 


























ee 


b- 


IO 






lO 


O 




CO 






CD 


C! 


IO 


= 


OS 


t^ 


X 






o« 


CM 


CM 


CM 


CO 


"* 


CM 


CO 


CO 


CO 




kS 


t^ 


t^ 


CO 


■* 


o 


CO 


CI 


o 


o 




00 


CM 


N 




IO 


CM 




"<* 




• X 




CM 


CO 


oo 


CM 




-r 


X 


00 






























C5 


CM 




U0 


r^ 


■* 


o 


CM 






■f 


30 


US 


CN 


CO 


-^< 






o 






oc 






I- 




CO 


"5 


•* 


IO 




OS 


CO 


"0 


CO 


»-o 


•* 


■^ 


i>r 


^r 






CO 


CO 


co 


CD 


>o 


IO 


"5 


»o 


IO 




-0 


to 


co 


r- 




00 


e» 


CM 


^ 


CO 






OS 


"* 


o 


X 


o 




O 


Tl 






«# 


CM 


•*f 


o 


CM 




CO 




CO 
























CM 


CO 


CO 


00 




CO 


00 




o 


DO 


c^S 


"- 1 








*-' 




CO 


O0 


CO 
















































gj 




00 


CO 


C5 


CO 




o 


CO 


OS 












— 


c. 


CM 


us 


CM 




o 


X 


IO 




— 


U0 


o 


C5 


























b a 


CM 


CO 


"0 








00 








•- ~ 


cm 






X 


CM 






c: 


t-- 










cq 


CN 


■* 




■* 




CM 




£ 






















"■— ' 






















^ 
























oo 






C5 




OO 


CO 


oo 


TC 






oo 




— 




lO 


CO 






CM 












"0 




o 




























co 


■"* 


CO 


"* 


CO 


CO 


Tt< 


u- 


•>*< 
























m CD £ 


t~- 


00 


_ 


"3 


O0 


»o 


00 


CM 


IO 




CN 






t— 


CO 


t^ 




= 






°l 


CO 


C5 


o 


CO. 


r-~ 


^1 


es 


UO 




o 




IO 


-r 




CO 




CO 


co' 


I 


rH 




















W 






















,-A 


CM 


oo 


_ 


CO 


00 


CO 


— 








3 3 




co 


CNI 


OS 






r— 








°1 


us 


-* 


■-T 


CO 


•* 


CM 










00 


CM* 






o 


CO 








o 




CNI 




as 


CM 


L- 








h-5 o 


CO 




© 






«5 


— 








Ph 






















T}< 


o 


X 


■<*< 


= 


CO 


t~ 








v -' 


CO 


t^ 


IO 


U5 


»o 




CO 








11 


o 


-1 


CM 


CM 


f~ 


UO 


— 


t ^ 


co 




CM 


Tf 


CO 






-M 


CO 


-^ 


l> 




CN_ 


"i 


CO 


"^1 


o 


00 


CO 


"**! 


°i. 












Hi 


■~ 


co 




CO 




c3 O 


CO 


X 




X 






IO 


CM 






pqpq 










CM 






CO 


CO 


























ID 

2~ 


_ 


CO 


.- 


CO 


-, 


00 


^ 


o 


3 




<M 




IO 


>o 






X 






io 


X 


CN 




o 








CM 




B c 
ca 3 






















t- 


X 




r- 


--: 


o 


IO 




C5 






o 




Ci 




cr- 


to- 


IO 


Ci 




— c 


c= 




IO 


t~- 


»o 


o 


co 


IQ 


CM 




M CL, 
























— 


X 




"0 


o 


- 


tc 


ca 




^ 


N 




















,4, . 






















r. 


•"* 


CO 


CO 


CM 


•^** 


CM 


Ci 


o 






— ~z 






= 


CO 


o 


>o 


CM 




o 




<- z. 
pq 


t^ 


•O 


EC 


oo 


CM 


CM 




■* 


IO 
























•*** 


■»*< 


CO 


CM 


— 


o 


•»f 


o 


*-< 
























— ' 






















32 






















ti 






















< 






















a 






















>H 
























00 


££ 


VD* 


ITS 




CO 


1 




CO 






c 




= 


c 


l 


o 


o 


o 


o 






c; 


es 


oa 


C~. 






- 


Ci 



734 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Receipts of Potatoes and Poultry at Boston, 1900-08. 



















Potatoes 
(Bushels). 


POTJLTKY. 


YEARS. 


Packages. 


For Export 
(Packages). 


1908 


6,167,318 


352,381 


38,655 


1907, 
















5,818,699 


380,396 


48,795 


1906, 
















4,626,744 


412,959 


55,216 


1905, 
















4,163,102 


302,783 


23,032 


1904, 
















4,344,479 


298,082 


58,391 


1903, 
















4,720,057 


278,586 


62,918 


1902, 
















3,893,692 


316,319 


85,200 


1901, 
















3,616,502 


319,129 


63,205 


1900, 
















2,928,164 


314,943 


- 



Quincy Market Receipts, 1890-1908. 

















Rents. 


Miscellan- 
eous. 


Totals. 


YEARS. 


Gross 
Income. 


Net 
Income. 


1890 


$74,793.00 


$622.88 


$75,415.88 


$58,600.43 


1891, . 














53,782.25 


340.92 


54,123.17 


44,393.60 


1892, . 














71,713.85 


484.22 


72,198.07 


55,899.34 


1893, . 














72,193.00 


581.67 


72,774.67 


58,288.81 


1894, . 














72,193.00 


658.22 


72,851.22 


58,256.71 


1895, . 














72,249.25 


629.32 


72,878.57 


58,819.81 


1896, . 














72,318.00 


757.52 


73,075.52 


52,706.56 


1897, . 














71,989.00 


611.55 


72,600.55 


61,153.56 


1898, . 














72,518.50 


549.38 


73,067.88 


63,349.58 


1899, . 














71,149.50 


576.09 


71,725.59 


59,580.87 


1900, . 














71,805.00 


639.18 


72,444.18 


44,969.08 


1901, . 














71,819.00 


413.98 


72,232.98 


59,162.06 


1902, . 














86,909.00 


375.11 


87,284.11 


74,668.32 


1903, . 














92,009.00 


256.83 


92,265.83 


67,191.25 


1904, . 














92,395.50 


218.91 


92,614.41 


79,025.54 


1905, . 














92,496.50 


216.09 


92,712.59 


75,537.42 


1906, . 














92,684.00 


171.72 


92,855.72 


79,311.16 


1907, . 














92,554.50 


149.68 


92,704.18 


78,707.11 


1908, . 














92,829.50 


152.64 


92,982.14 


80,969.78 


Totals, 




$1,490,401.35 


$8,405.91 


$1,498,807.26 


$1,210,590.99 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



735 



Quincy Market Expenditures, 1890-1908. 





Capital 
(New Con- 
struction). 


Repairs 

(on 

Building). 


Maintenance. 




YEARS. 


Salaries. 


Miscella- 
neous. 


Totals. 


1890 

1891 

1892 

1893 

1894 

1895 

1896 

1897 

1898 

1899 

1900 

1902 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 


$1,725.46 
7,362.25 

f 3,292.85 
\ 10,000.00 


$5,114.57 
2,221.47 
4,709.37 
2,435.71 
2,150.17 
3,254.77 
5,314.47 
2,831.92 
916.63 
2,492.40 

18,118.07 
3,753.36 
3,284.74 
} 1,303.91 
2,168.88 
5,855.09 
1,406.70 
2,278.19 
1,093.81 


$8,855.84 
6,747.00 
10,106.99 
10,581.95 
10,950.02 
8,691.11 
6,392.91 
6,513.00 
5,712.50 
7,396.77 
7,787.13 
7,777.10 
7,805.40 
8,824.30 
9,405.95 
9,491.20 
9,595.40 
9,984.57 
9,423.85 


$2,845.04 
761.10 
1,482.37 
1,468.20 
1,494.32 
1,387.42 
1,299.33 
2,102.07 
2,089.17 
2,255.55 
1,569.90 
1,540.46 
1,525.65 
1,653.52 
2,014.04 
1,848.88 
2,542.46 
1,734.31 
1,494.70 


$16,815.45 
9,729.57 
16,298.73 
14,485.86 
14,594.51 
14,058.76 
20,368.96 
11,446.99 
9,718.30 
12,144.72 
27,475.10 
13,070.92 
12,615.79 
25,074.58 
13,588.87 
17,175.17 
13,544.56 
13,997.07 
12,012.36 


Totals 


522,380.56 


370,684.23 


S162.042.99 


S33.108.49 


S288.216.27 



736 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Faneuil Hall Building Receipts, 1890-1908. 



Years. 


Market 
Rents. 


Hall 
Rents. 


Totals. 


Expendi- 
tures. 


Net 
Income. 


1890 


$17,671.20 


$185.50 


$17,856.70 


$3,584.08 


$14,272.62 


1891 














13,253.40 


143.55 


13,396.95 


756.27 


12,640.68 


1892 
















17,671.20 


58.75 


17,729.95 


3,739.24 


13,990.71 


1893 
















17,671.20 


289.85 


17,961.05 


1,246.43 


16,714.62 


1894 
















17,671.20 


14.75 


17,685.95 


1,106.62 


16,579.33 


1895 
















17,671.20 


186.80 


17,858.00 


1,390.13 


16,467.87 


1896 
















17,671.20 


- 


17,671.20 


1,479.71 


16,191.49 


1897 
















18,088.80 


- 


18,088.80 


1,835.96 


16,252.84 


1898 


l 














18,228.00 


- 


18,228.00 


7,557.69 


10,670.31 


1899 


1 














18,228.00 


- 


18,228.00 


101,198.32 


82,970.32 


1900 


l 














18,228.00 


480.00 


18,708.00 


11,712.07 


6,995.93 


1901 
















18,228.00 


670.00 


18,898.00 


7,413.03 


11,484.97 


1902 
















22,227.00 


875.00 


23,102.00 


7,055.10 


16,046.90 


1903 
















23,560.00 


910.00 


24,470.00 


7,592.28 


16,877.72 


1904 
















23,560.00 


960.00 


24,520.00 


8,412.97 


16,107.03 


1905 
















23,560.00 


1,110.00 


24,670.00 


6,038.90 


118,631.10 


1906 
















23,560.00 


945.00 


24,505.00 


6,249.42 


18,255.58 


1907 
















23,560.00 


765.00 


24,325.00 


6,634.06 


17,690.04 


1908 
















23,560.00 


1,770.00 


25,330.00 


5,938.76 


19,391.24 




Tot 


als, 




$373,868.40 


$9,364.20 


$383,232.60 


$190,941.04 


$192,291.56 



In 1898, 1899 and 1900 there was expended $104,500 for reconstruction of building. 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



737 



Faneuil Hall Building Expenditures, 1890-1908. 

















Capital 
(New Con- 
struction). 


Repairs 

(on 

Building). 


Maintenance. 




YEARS. 


Salaries. 


M iscella- 
neous. 


Totals. 


1890 


- 


$2,695.60 


$780.00 


$108.48 


$3,584.08 


1891 














- 


61.58 


630.00 


64.69 


756.27 


1892 














- 


2,662.20 


930.00 


147.04 


3,739.24 


1893 














- 


45.11 


900.00 


301.32 


1,246.43 


1894 














- 


80.74 


900.00 


125.88 


1,106.62 


1895 














- 


152.67 


950.00 


287.46 


1,390.13 


1896 














- 


271.16 


950.00 


258.55 


1,479.71 


1897 














- 


371.35 


900.00 


564.61 


1,835.96 


1898 














$6,392.36 


22.25 


1,000.00 


143.08 


7,557.69 


1899 














96,833.93 


2,195.07 


970.55 


1,198.77 


101,198.32 


1900 














1,273.71 


5,333.34 


1,384.55 


3,720.47 


11,712.07 


1901 














- 


4,056.51 


1,519.00 


1,837.52 


7,413.03 


1902 














- 


1,691.75 


2,531.30 


2,832.05 


7,055.10 


1903 














- 


1,567.22 


3,126.62 


2,898.44 


7,592.28 


1904 














- 


2,334.42 


3,022.70 


3,055.85 


8,412.97 


1905 














- 


1,217.87 


2,852.60 


1,968.43 


6,038.90 


1906 














- 


208.64 


3,388.40 


2,652.38 


6,249.42 


1907 














- 


942.96 


3,492.00 


2,199.10 


6,634.06 


1908 












- 


503.50 


3,009.15 


2,426.11 


5,938.76 


Totals, 


S104.500.00 


$26,413.94 


$33,236.87 


$26,790.23 1 


$190,941.04 







Public Market Receipts, Baltimore, 1907. 

[Compiled from report of Comptroller of Baltimore. ] 



Retail Markets. 


Licenses. 


Rents. 


Per Diems. 


Sale 'of 
Stalls. 


Totals. 


Belair market, .... 


$4,232.50 


$3,236.25 


$3,834.80 


$44.00 


$11,347.55 


Canton market, . 








160.00 


217.00 


235.50 


- 


612.50 


Cross Street market, 








. 1,918.75 


503.75 


1,864.70 


- 


4,287.20 


Fell's Point market, 








2,469.50 


3,382.00 


2,518.60 


- 


8,370.10 


Hanover market, 








1,020.00 


1,261.00 


962.90 


30.00 


3,273.90 


Hollins market, . 








1.825.00 


462.00 


1,370.40 


- 


3,657.40 


Lexington market, 








6,650.00 


3,913.00 


6,456.80 


16.00 


17,035.80 


Northeast market, 








855.00 


717.00 


1,060.15 


- 


2,632.15 


Richmond market, 








1,220.50 


870.00 


1,668.55 


- 


3,759.05 


Totals, 


$20,351.25 


$14,561.25 


$19,972.40 


S90.00 


$54,975.65 


Lafayette market, 








" 


- 


1,376.65 


- 


3,055.65 


Grand totals, 




$20,351.25 


$14,561.25 


$21,349.05 


$90.00 


$58,031.30 



733 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



g 5 



^3 



ft3 



o 

% 

P 

& 

o 


O 


3,715,139 

1,367,716 

612,279 

594,618 

531,313 

483,107 

414,950 

381,403 

332,934 

300,625 

293,217 

265,394 

197,555 

170,798 

173,064 

147,111 

135,487 

86,148 

83,275 

92,716 

57,397 

58,016 

50,760 

40,161 

34,344 


CO 

us 

o 

CO 

CO 

o" 


e 


4,225,681 

1,466,408 

661,666 

609,175 

561,120 

531,527 

475,864 

386,724 

347,123 

318,652 

312,548 

295,979 

227,698 

189,384 

185,479 

153,524 

148,722 

106,227 

105,278 

103,248 

69,731 

64,275 

59,963 

42,704 

36,620 


o 

CO 

eo 

«5 

CO 




CO 

o 


s 

8 
a 


$284,826 
341 
23,475 
95,538 
44,606 
64,638 
13,824 
40,814 

2,332i 
176,400 
13,533 
10,818 
679i 

28,142 

7,105 

329 

4,334 

10,813 
9,510 
471 
1,157 
5,991 
5,782 
9,150 


CO 

go" 

3 


CD £ 

as 
y. -p 


$27,992 
10,140 
13,417 
15,311 
16,653 
20,538 
22,274 
15,884 
14,779 
10,429 
5,835 
28,909 
22,150 

1,862 

3,103 

12,674 

15,101 

2,491 

1,344 

29 

3,466 

2,288 

1,618 

792 


o 
o 

CO 
CO 


73 

a 
"3 

o 

0) 


$312,818 
10,107 
36,892 

110,849 
61,259 
85,176 
36,098 
56,698 
12,447 

186,829 
19,368 
39,727 
21,471 

30,004 
10,208 
13,003 
19,435 
13,304 
10,854 
500 
4,623 
8,279 
7,400 
9,942 


OS 

co_ 




1 . 


05 

s 

O 

o 

a 

0) 


$217,679 

4,334 
26,158 
102,071 
31,792 
66,298 
18,176 
40.902 

4,696i 
162,258 
15,297 
23,438 
17,511 

4,772 
28,887 

8,049 
12,175 

8,257 
12,633 
23,176 
13,314 

7,671 
10,760 

7,844 

6,481 


CO 
CO 
U5 

CO 
00 




$79,600 

7,133 

13,653 

14,239 

24,361 

36,864 

17,847 

21,841 

17,916 

36,924 

11,442 

24,606 

15,570 

5,790 

7,878 

2,947 

12,864 

10,219 

2,427 

3,758 

4,976 
6,829 
3,093 
4,391 


OO 

co 

00 

OO 


a 
"3 

o 

0) 


$297,279 
11,467 
39,811 

116,310 
56,153 

103,162 
36,023 
62,743 
13,220 

199,182 
26,739 
48,044 
33,081 
10,562 
36,765 
10,996 
25,039 
18,476 
15,060 
26,934 
13,314 
12,647 
17,589 
10,937 
10,872 


to 
o 

co" 
to 

CO 


! 


CO 

'A 
H 
O 




• 1 
i 

. 1 
o 
















New York, . 

Philadelphia, 

St. Louis, 

Boston, 

Baltimore, 

Pittsburgh, . 

Cleveland, 

Buffalo, 

Cincinnati, . 

New Orleans, 

Washington, . 

Newark, 

Indianapolis, 

Rochester, 

Kansas City, 

Denver, 

Columbus, . 

Richmond, . 

Nashville, 

Dayton, 

Duluth, 

San Antonio, 

Houston, 

Springfield, O., 

Knoxville, 



1910." 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



739 



Appendix L. 



ARTICLES PURCHASED IN BOSTON AND WEIGHED AND 
MEASURED BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF WEIGHTS 
AND MEASURES. 



Article and Address. 



Gross Weight. 



Net Weight. 


Package 
Price 

(Cents). 


5 oz. 


18 


59ie oz - 


15 


\§ 2 /\K oz. 


25 


146/ie OZ. 


12 


14Hi« oz. 


14 


8 oz. 


20 


SYs2 oz. 


18 


7Hi 6 oz. 


13 


8%6 oz. 


23 


83/io oz. 


15 


8 oz. 


15 


8%oz. 


10 


5^io oz. 


5 


9%oz. 


10 


5 17 /s2 OZ. 


5 


4J4 oz. 


5 


HSie oz. 


10 


1 lb. 12"/iooz. 


15 


lOio/io oz. 


12 


1 lb. 8Vi oz. 


14 


4 lbs. 11% oz. 


18 


2 lbs. 14 8 /i6 oz. 


12 


1 lb. lo 7 i.i oz. 


14 


lOH/i.i oz. 


15 


1 lb. 13% fl oz. 


10 


21% oz. 


10 



Pound 
Price 

(Cents). 



Bacon, Beechnut Brand, Beechnut Pack- 
ing Company, Canajoharie, N. Y. 

Bacon, Rex Sliced, The Cudahy Packing 
Company, Chicago, 111. 

Chocolates, Gold Medal, Houghton & 
Dutton, Boston. 

Tuxedo Currants (no address), Wood, 
Pollard Company, Boston. 

Velveteen Currants, Cremida Bros., Tat- 
rai, Greece, Wood, Pollard Company, 
Boston. 

Baking Powder, Cleveland, Cleveland 
Baking Powder Company, New York. 

Congress Yeast Powder, D. & L. Slade 
Company, Boston. 

Queen Baking Powder, Manufactured for 
C. D. Cobb & Bros., Boston. 

Royal Baking Powder, Royal Baking 
Powder Company, New Jersey. 

Rumford Baking Powder, Manufactured 
forC. D. Cobb & Bros., Boston. 

Biscuits, Cheese, National Biscuit Com- 
pany, Cambridge. 

Graham Crackers, National Biscuit 
Company, Cambridge. 

Crackers, Oysterettes, National Biscuit 
Company, Cambridge. 

Crackers, Oatmeal, National Biscuit 
Company, Cambridge. 

Biscuits, Uneeda, National Biscuit Com- 
pany, Cambridge. 

Biscuits, Zu-Zu, National Biscuit Com- 
panv, Cambridge. 

Corn Flakes, Kellogg's, K. T. C. F. Com- 
pany, Battle Creek, Mich. 

Cream of Wheat, Cream of Wheat Com- 
pany, Minneapolis, Minn. 

Force, H. O. Mills, Buffalo, N. Y., 

H. O., H. O. Company, Buffalo, N. Y.,. 

Hominy, F. & S.,QuakerOats Company, 
Chicago, 111. 

Hecker's Cream Hominy, Hecker, Jones, 
Jewell Milling Company, New York. 

Malto Breakfast Food, Malted Cereals 
Company, Burlington, Vt. 

Maple Flake, Hvgienic Food Company, 
Battle Creek, Mich. 

Beck's Rolled Oats, Beck Cereal Com- 
pany, Detroit, Mich. 

Quaker Oats (pure), Quaker Oats Com- 

, pany, Chicago, 111. 



11% oz. 

12*5/ 16 oz. 

18 oz. 

15 9 /l6 oz. 
15 10 /i 6 oz. 

10~/i 6 oz. 

10 3 /l6 OZ. 

9% oz. 

10%6 OZ. 

10H oz. 
lOVio oz. 
10% oz. 
7%e oz. 
12% oz. 

IVi oz. 

5%oz. 

13i sio oz. 

1 lb. 15%6 oz. 

12% oz. 

1 lb. 10«i(soz. 
5 lbs. 1 oz. 

3 lbs. vio oz. 

2 lbs. 1% 6 oz. 
13i"i (i oz. 

1 lb. lS^'io oz. 
1 lb. 7 oz. 



57.60 
43.00 

13.30 
15.20 

40.00 

35.80 

27.00 

45.20 

29.20 

30.00 

18.00 

15.20 

16.20 

14.40 

18.72 

14.30 

8.40 

18.00 

9.30 

3.60 

4.10 

7.10 

22.40 

5.40 

7.57 



740 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 









Package 


Pound 


Article and Address. 


Gross Weight. 


Net Weight. 


Price 

(Cents). 


Price 

(Cents). 


Quaker Oats (white), Quaker Oats Com- 


1 lb. 611/ie oz. 


1 lb. 49/i6 oz. 


10 


7.70 


pany, Chicago, 111. 










National Oats, Corno Milk Company, 


1 lb. 8% 6 oz. 


1 lb. QH oz. 


8 


5.60 


St. Louis, Mo. 










Cook's Flaked Rice, American Rice Food 


12 oz. 


913/16 oz. 


14 


22.70 


Manufacturing Company, Matteawan, 
N.J. 
Cook's Malto Rice, American Rice Food 










1213/ie OZ. 


10% 6 oz. 


15 


22.90 


Manufacturing Company, Matteawan, 
N.J. 
Puffed Rice, Quaker Oats Company, 










9Koz. 


6^goz. 


13 


31.40 


Chicago, 111. 










Ralston's Breakfast Food, Ralston Pu- 


1 lb. 1510/ie oz. 


1 lb. 132/ 16 oz. 


15 


8.20 


rina Company, St. Louis, Mo. 










Shredded Wheat, Shredded Wheat Com- 


14 1 %e oz. 


12iyi6 oz. 


12 


15.20 


pany, Niagara Falls, N. Y. 










Foulds' Wheat Germ, The Foulds Milling 


1 lb. ll%e oz. 


1 lb. 910/ie oz. 


12 


7.40 


Company, Cincinnati, 0. 










Wheatlet, Franklin Mills Company, 


1 lb. 14% 6 oz. 


1 lb. 13 oz. 


15 


8.20 


Lockport, N. Y. 










Aunt Jemima's Pancake Flour, Davis 


1 lb. 13%e oz. 


1 lb. 12% 6 oz. 


10 


5.60 


Milling Company, St. Joseph, Mo. 










Hecker's Farina, Hecker, Jones, Jewell 


1 lb. Vie -oz 


15^ie oz. 


10 


10.50 


Milling Company, New York. 










Franklin Wheat Flour, Franklin Mills 


5 lbs. 2% oz. 


4 lbs. 15 oz. 


23 


4.65 


Company, Batavia, N. Y. 










Reliable Flour, ReliableFlour Company, 


3 lbs. % e oz. 


2 lbs. 15% 6 oz. 


23 


7.75 


Boston. 










Reliable Graham Flour, Reliable Flour 


3 lbs. 1% 6 oz. 


2 lbs. 15% 6 oz. 


22 


7.30 


Company, Boston. 










Hecker's Cream Farina, Hecker, Jones, 


1 lb. 4i3Aeoz.i 


lib. 3oz.2 


15 


12.60 


Jewell Milling Company, New York. 










Hecker's Buckwheat, flecker, Jones, 


2 lbs. 1315/ie oz. 


2 lbs. Ili4/i6 oz. 


17 


6.20 


Jewell Milling Company, New York. 










Pettijohn's Breakfast Food, Quaker Oats 


1 lb. 112A 6 oz. 


1 lb. 8 oz. 


13 


8.60 


Company, Chicago, 111. 










Grape Nuts, Postum Cereal Company, 


1 lb. 2/ 16 oz. 


15^6 oz. 


12 


13.60 


Battle Creek, Mich. 











1 With spoon. 



2 Spoon, Hi e oz. 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



741 



Appendix M. 



SAVINGS AND CO-OPERATIVE BANKS. 



Savings Bank Deposits (not including Dividends) and Withdrawals (includ- 
ing Dividends), 1890-1909. 



Year ending 
October 31. 



1890 
1891 



1893 



1897 



1899 



Deposits. 



$72,023,703.64 
73,405,435.08 
82,535,534.15 
75,727,471.03 
74,946,570.01 
80,768,468.89 
78,916,530.70 
82,814,012.78 
82,608,619.69 
94,045,963.69 



Withdrawals. 



$65,065,778.43 
71,172,935.04 
73,658,237.93 
84,403,075.29 
74,124,697.33 
74,309,785.76 
81,751,390.90 
79,334,807.88 
83,382,101.76 
82,652,451.93 



Year ending 
October 31. 



1900, 
1901, 
1902, 
1903, 
1904, 
1905, 
1906, 
1907, 
1908, 
1909, 



Deposits. 



Withdrawals. 



$93,099,624.04 
96,531,498.85 
101,542,089.27 
104,893,853.85 
105,466,148.68 
116,026,890.90 
125,315,148.00 
132,041,930.00 
118,007,503.00 
134,000,118.93 



$89,524,599.96 
95,535,702.81 
95,234,951.56 
104,460,530.78 
104,508,951.49 
107,361,106.89 
117,709,002.00 
144,588,418.00 
142,191,093.00 
127,526,868.61 



Co-operative Bank Deposits and Withdrawals, 1892-1909. 



Year ending 
October 31. 


Deposits. 


With- 
drawals. 


Year endin 
October 31 


Deposits. 


With- 
drawals. 


1892 


$4,585,522 


$2,648,873 


1901, . 




$6,841,854 


$7,233,394 


1893, . - 






5,036,998 


3,528,455 


1902, . 






7,225,419 


6,875,248 


1894, . 






5,132,331 


4,714,357 


1903, . 






7,714,033 


6,664,564 


1895, . 






5,404,196 


4,549,258 


1904, . 






8,200,427 


6,977,618 


1896, . 






5,782,949 


4,695,071 


1905, . 






8,767,095 


7,458,499 


1897, . 






6,016,142 


5,696,457 


1906, . 






9,657,366 


7,744,759 


1898, . 






6,180,426 


6,347,338 


1907, . 






10,790,019 


8,426,918 


1899, . 






6,299,700 


6,724,671 


1908, . 






11,502,178 


9,758,521 


1900, . 






6,579,265 


6,989,849 


1909, . 

1 






12,352,854 


10,502,363 



742 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



M 

M 
A 

Ph 



GO 

K 
hJ 
O 

w 

O 

m 

a 

o 
o 

X 

o 

►J 
o 



o 


X 


>-H 


w 


Ci 


a 


>-H 




1 






bC 


"0 


"S 


*-i 






=5> 


tu 
CD 


5>- 


rfi 


o 




£ 


c 


J- 




Si 1 


fl 


£' 


o 


^ 




05 


o 


to 


G J 


05 


o 








T3 


5>- 


3 


^ 


<< 




3 
m 






5- 


K 


3 


o 


cc 


a 


05 




^ 


o 


Wh 


tc 


Sh 


a 


3 


o 


co 


w 






> 


.£> 




£ 






w 








*~ 


a 


&H 






Ki 




H 



ooo o 
o o »o o 



CM T-H T-< 



NHTdH 



OOOO 



oo 
"so 
2g 



<M >C O O 



l CM OCM Oi 



"OOO 
t- "S o 

COffllO CM ~H ■ 



oiMNH owoh 



00 O , i-i 



CM O 



OOOO lO o o o o o o 



ooauj 



ONNrHCOOM ,i-i 



OOOO >C O O O O O "5 o 

COOOO CM O O O lOOCMlO 

moooo onna>o ■* cm »o cm 

INH OCOOH 



OO00N 



8 2 



CM 00 CM 



lOOOOOiOOOOOl^O 
■*fOOOlOCNOO»00000 
INOOOnNHOMOitdO 
— i •* Ort 



O O 00 O O O CO C 



"CO 



00000 



mo o o o o < 

r~ o o o io o < 

(MOOCO CM 00 C 

OOlON , O CO C 



lOOH , ~* 



lO o o 

MOW 



CD j0 



is 



tf £ 



^ s 
m5 



« 9 S 

-bio 
i -c o 3 



^ (D-.2 M3 3"- 3 O h 



• bfl gj 
O ■ 

aS +3 5 O 

ct> o o ,rj 
Eh PhO CC 



88 



o .. 

O " 



"> o a. 
A o c 



1910.] 



HOUSE — Xo. 1750. 



743 



.8 



e 

a. 



© 

rH 
<?> 

s 

at 


SO. 0750 

1050 

5.1000 

2.1750 

. 0300 

.0300 

.2000 

.3500 

.4000 
.0535 
.1700 

.1050 

.3800 
.5700 


ii 

O OC 
C9 IC 


s 

ci 


1.2500 
.0125 
2.0000 
1 . 5000 
4.5000 
1 . 2500 


cocei--;ccoooo t^o o 
mwccMCc:;=c ocic o 

CCiiflCf-NC-Oi.': C: CM lc 
CO — '^-OCCMCCCfO o — t^ 

O lO CM 

w 


o 
o 
o 
o 

to 


1 


O OOOO CO 
C OOOO ICO 
*-"3 IOOOIQ O O 
CM t~ IC "O CM — 00 

1 . 1 .... 1 . . 
— — — ^*> — ■* 


eo 

o 


ooooowooooo o o 

OONNOCNMCTfO — CM 
3 -*« 


o o 

o o 


' 


OO O OOO 

o «o c coo 

i-l -S- O O CM C 

CM — i U5 lO — ' lO 


e 
e> 

to 

© 
ei 


USOOOiO>OOOiQOOOOOOO 

N u? C C N t^ C C r^ C CV C C i.-; C c 
c c: e O ^ ~; * z N C ■* C X -< X LI 
OOaiOOONNOCOOrtOrttiJuJ 

3 ' w '~ ' 


o 
c 
o 
o 

to 


1 


o o o c o c 
o o coco 

lO O ICCMC 


iffiC O O C C l~ C O t- C c c 

eaoiQ m re '-t — o — t^ — o 

CO^N s M (N c r: C - — 00 
o ■* — 


o?5 

— lO 
tO PC 


o 
~ 
o 


C lOOO OC 
LCNiSO O — 
"r<NO O — 

— CM — CM 


§ 


icoo c o o c c c o o o o 
cm c o o O o io O to c o o o 
io o o io c: to cc o l~ co — xt~- 

O — "O CINNOrtC O — CM LC 
O >T5 


o 
o 

o 

to 


' 


o o ooo 

O O O L.1 o 
O O OOO 
o *o lO — lit 


e 

T-l 


ceo oo oo c o c o o o o 
w o o ioooooocoo»ooo 

US C: «S T-iCNO-C^NN-X 

OOl.- occmcmoccc — c — cm 

O ->J< 


c<5 


o 
- 


S o o c i>\ 

O O LO o o 

O OCM LC — 




OOO OOOOOUSOO o 

ClCO kCOOOC-r-OO O 

to«io cc ic "-- cm cr. — c o -c 

O O t- C CM CM — CM O CM O CM 

o 'ro 


oo 

o o 

to r- 


o 


O OOO 

o coo 
c o io o 

O lO CM — 
— — CI 


i 


lO O O O »C O O O O lO o oo 
CMlOOO r~ C O l~ O t~- o oo 

to C O C ci oq lc M c: f to MO 
O — OC O ONN«NO O CM 00 

O CON 

- 


o 

CM 


o 

c 
c 


CO OOO 
O O OOO 
O O OOO 
t-l O OU5 *-> 


1 -• 
s 


IQOOOUSOOOOOiOOO o 

CM l~ O l- r^ -f O O O O -f O O O 
tC C". O t^ M C 1 CM -if CC O Lf o — -s- 
OO — OOOCMCM — Tf C CM — CM 


o 
o 


o 


CO OC 
O O LCC 

o cs o c 
— o — o 


O f CM 
6© 


H 

- 
1 


















tf 

• • . . ■ • '3 .~ — 

^ 8 J? 2 
*8 2 B -£ I 

if!"-- vrlf 

- - ._— tf--— tr c= c - £ - 
■- _r ID—, .2 tC - -■- 3 O u S CO 

pq (s,mtff8,HPQfflSoQO«EH pi, u 




»3 1 
WpQ i 

x 






4 1 

. - o 

■ 2 2 Sol • ■ • • 5- 

^ ££ = = = ;- -z"=fc 

— S — — - — ~i t > c '- 

U := - x -' x '_ - 



744 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



00 



5 



^ 


T3 

3 


"tt 


<! 


<» 




co 




M 


d 


•8 


GO 


It 


O 


ftn 


O 


oo 


e 


■» 


o 


^ 


a 


ft. 


" H 


ft. 




3 


cfl 


*2 


a 


> 


00 






<vo 


.Q 


$ 


3 








oooo< 
o o o o < 

>0 O ■* CO c 
t^—iOO< 



:ggg 



oo 

O l« 



O"00 
ONO 

WHO 



O O *h m co o 



oooooooo 
oor^iooooo 



ggg 

IQtSO 



OOOO OOOOOO 

lOOOO O O O O CO 

CO OO O i« CM 00 lO ■* TJ< 

OOMOl O-h^COO 



gg 

oo 



COO T-H 



ggg 

ISOIQ 
CO O CM 



ooo 
iooo 
co c- »o 



O CM CM -^ OM 



"* O KJNOffi 



C^IOOOOOOO' 



OOhujoONN^i 



iiOOOOiOOOOiOO 

OOMM®MO-*IM 
— ION 



OOOO 
OOOO 
BJOU30 

cm -^ est o 



OOOO 

o»ooo 

MNOO 

0=00 CO CM 



OOOO 
O >OCM •* 



gg 



iCOOOO 

co o o o ua 

■*00OiO"O 
OO-tfHOOO CMCMTt^O 



> O O 00 



«o o 
r-o 



OOOO 

OOOO 

ioo o o 

CM -HH 00 «5 



.COiOlOCOlOOOCqiOi 

OO^NOOCON^O! 



o 

3 


3 


44 


^ S3 


&i 


&§ -3 • 


c .;.; 


m«S8„- 










PQM 


Eh«« 



.Q en 

a m 

K G 

» © $ 

.hM3-30 0» 



o 

.fl 



:r "a '-3; 



X5 g „J 
C8 «« S 

b .' S § P 



IS 1 5" 



m M- 



AhO go ^fflO 



• fefi 

9 

if 
'33 

coo: 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



745 



•rt o o o o 
<M o o o o 

MMNON 

ooracoio 



S3 

oo 






l^O 

CO !>• 



)NNt)<0 



O a 

© O 



iot~--a<eoior^.Tf*fi 



CK5 O O O O t- 



OOiOOOOO O 
OiOCOiOOOOO 

OOaOOOMINliO 



CO rt 



OOiOOOOOO 
OOCvliOOOOO 

U5-HOC 



lONIN-*! 



ooc oo 



niomoo 



^h o-mo 



0C*J<M-<1<0 



§8 

us io 

oao 



! 



OOiOOOOOO 

oor^ioooo o> 

NOiOONNWO 



3 



§ S8 

t- OO 



o o o o o 



no »^ 






■ ~-* 



- £ I = b 

■- 3 .9 5 oo 



> I > " 






746 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Prices of Seventeen Articles from Price Current List of a Boston Wholesale 

Produce House. 



[Quotations for February of each year.] 



Articles. 


1880. 


1890. 


1900. 


1910. 


Increase 
(per Cent.), 
1900-1910. 


Butter, .... 


Cents. 
30-33 


Cents. 

27-28 


Cents. 
25M-26M 


Cents. 
31 


+19 


Cheese, .... 


1434-15 


10H-10M 


12H-13 


17M 


+37 


Eggs: — 












Hennery, 


21 


18 


20 


34 


+70 


Western, 


18 


14M 


15^-16 


31-32 


+100 


Held stock, . 


10-18 


8-10 


11 


26 


+136 


Pea beans (per bushel), 


S1.80-S1.90 


S1.85-S1.90 


$2.20 


S2.35-S2.40 


+9 


Baldwin apples, . 


S2.75-S3.00 


S3 . 50-S3 . 75 


S3.00-S3.25 


S3.00-S3.50 


+4 


Onions (per bushel), . 


•SI. 25 


S125-S1.50 


40-45 


70-75 


+75 


Potatoes (per bushel), 


50-55 


70-75 


63-68 


50-55 


—20 


Poultry: — 












Turkeys, 


13-14 


16-17 


12-12^ 


25-26 


+100 


Fowl, .... 


7-10 


11 


10-11 


17-18 


+70 


Chickens, 


10-11 


12 


11 


19-20 


+80 


Beef, 


m 


6M-7J4 


8^-9 


8H-9K 


+3 


Lamb, ..... 


9 


10-10)3 


9M-10 


12-WA 


+36 


Mutton, .... 


7-7H 


8-8^ 


7-7^ 


7^-10 


+20 


Veal, 


9-10 


10-11 


10-11 


13-14 


+30 


Hogs, 


6H-6M 


5-5^ 


5H-6 


11-11^ 


+100 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



747 



Prices of Supplies, 1906-10. 

[Quotations furnished by Mr. Frank R. Green, Manager of Randall Hall and Memorial Hall, 

Harvard University.] 



Supplies. 


1906. 


1907. 


1908. 


1909. 


1910. 


Hams (smoked), 


Cents. 
14 


Cents. 


Cents. 
10 


Cents. 
12 


Cents. 
20 


Bacon, 


16 


- 


- 


16 


21 


Eggs (fresh hennery), 


22 


- 


- 


21 


25 


Milk (per can, 8H quarts), 


- 


- 


- 


43H 


50 


Print buttef, .... 


32 


- 


- 


30 


34 


Pork loins, 


12 


- 


- 


11 


16 


Fowl 


15 


- 


14 


18 


18 


Beef loins, 


11 


- 


10 


12 


15 


Lamb (whole), .... 


12 


- 


12 


12 


16 


Sausages, 


10 


- 


- 


m 


13 


Salt pork (per barrel), 


$17.00 


- 


- 


- 


$25.00 


Potatoes (per bushel), 


- 


- 


- 


85 


50 


Lemons, 


- 


- 


- 


$3.00 


$4.00 


Grape fruit, .... 


- 


- 


$3.00 


$3.50 


$4.50 



Comparative Prices and Profits, Hogs and Mutton, 1865 and 1910. 

Hogs, 1865: — 
One hog, weighing 262 pounds, at \b}/> cents per pound, cost $40.61 

April 11, 1910: — 
One hog, weighing 262 pounds, at 14>2 cents per pound, cost $37.99 

Sold in Faneuil Hall market as follows: — 





1865. 


1910. 




Wholesale. 


Retail. 


100 pounds middlings, . 


At 18 cents, 


S18.00 


At 15 cents, $15.00 


At 18 cents, 


$18.00 


34 pounds ribs, 


At 16 .cents, 


5.44 


At 16 cents, 5.44 


At 18 cents, 


6.12 


36^ pounds legs, . 


At 17 cents, 


6.21 


At 193^ cents, 7.12M 


At 20 cents, 


7.30H 


20 pounds leaf, 


At 20 cents, 


4.00 


At 18 cents, 3 . 60 


At 20 cents, 


4.00 


29H pounds rough, 


At 15 cents, 


4.42 


At 15 cents, 4.42 


At 15 cents, 


4.42 


19H pounds shoulders, . 


At 14 cents, 


2.73 


At 12% cents, 2.48% 


At 14 cents, 


2.73 


16H pounds heads, 


At 7 cents, 


1.15 


At 6 cents, .98H 


At 7 cents, 


1.15 


4H pounds feet, 


- 


.10 


At 10 cents, . 10 


At 10 cents, 


.10 


% pound kidneys, 




.02 


At 2 cents, .02 


At 2 cents, 


.02 




$42.07 


$39.16 


$43.84 



748 COST OF LIVING. [May, 

Profit: — 

1865 $1.46 

1910 (April 11), wholesale by jobber, 1.17 

1910 (April 11), retail by jobber, 5.85 

Mutton, 1865: — 

One sheep, cost at Brighton, alive, 150 pounds, at 10 cents per pound, .... $15.00 

Sold at Faneuil Hall market, dressed, 85 pounds, at 15 cents per pound, . $12.75 

Skin 2.00 

Tallow, .75 

15.50 

Profit to butcher, $0.50 

1910: — 
Price to jobber same as in 1865, 15 cents per pound. 
Cost of same to jobber, 1865 and 1910, $12.75. 

Sold as follows: — 





1865. 


1910. 




Wholesale. 


Retail. 


Forequarters, 31J^ lbs., . 
Legs, 31J/J2 pounds, 
Chops, 15 pounds, 


At T12H cents, $3.94 
At 25 cents, 7.92 
At 16^ cents, 2.58 
At 10 cents, .45 


At 13 cents, $4.10 
At 18 cents, 5.67 
At 16 cents, 3.52 


At 13 cents, 
At 20 cents, 
At 18 cents, 


$4.10 
6.30 
3.96 


Tallow, 4H pounds, 
Shrinkage, 2^ pounds. 


$13.29 


$14.36 


$14.89 





Jobbers' profit: — 

1865, $2.14 

1910, wholesale, .54 

1910, retail 1.61 

Note. — Loins are figured at 22 pounds in the 1910 figures, including chops, tallow and shrink- 
age in the 1865 figures. 



1910.] 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



749 



Appendix O. 



COMPARATIVE EXPENDITURES FOR PROVISIONS AND 
CLOTHING AT STATE INSTITUTIONS. 



The per capita expenditures for provisions and clothing at State 
institutions since 1890 furnish an interesting record of the movement 
of prices in the last two decades. The figures given below were sup- 
plied by the chairman of the Prison Commission, the chairman of the 
Board of Charity and the executive officer of the Board of Insanity. 



Correctional Institutions. 









Massachu- 


Reforma- 


Jails 


AND 








Prison. 1 


setts Re- 
formatory. 


tory Prison 
for Women. 


Houses of 
Correction. 


Aggregates. 


YEARS. 


TO 

a 
o 


$ 


a 
o 


M 

C 


i 

o 


be 

a 


t*3 
c 
o 


t 


i 

o 


i 








.2 

> 


















> 


3 


J2 


> 


rC 


> 


ja 


> 


Xi 




2 


o 


2 


O 


p 


O 


2 


o 


2 


o 




Ph 


O 


Ph 


O 


Ph 


D 


Ph 


O 


Ph 


D 


1890, . . . $45.26 


$14.04 


$61.76 


$29.03 


$22.97 


$6.07 


$45.49 


$9.03 


$43.87 


$14.54 


1891, 






: 54.62 


14.37 


62.37 


19.77 


27.66 


7.16 


46.65 


8.66 


47.83 


12.49 


1892, 






! 61.24 


18.80 


46.26 


19.17 


27.70 


8.08 


i 44.82 


8.42 


45.01 


13.62 


1893, 






57.22 


13.13 


43.78 


21.41 


25.43 


8.22 


47.42 


9.69 


43.46 


13.11 


1894, 






43.29 


11.14 


38.80 


23.28 


26.36 


10.55 


45.72 


9.75 


38.54 


13.68 


1895, 






34.70 


9.36 


37.69 


21.17 


24 96 


7.33 


! 43.80 


9.49 


35.29 


11.84 


1896, 






31.20 


9.61 


37.56 


21.59 


19.38 


5.79 


: 38.65 


9.49 


31.70 


11.62 


1897, 






33.39 


7.49 


38.57 


26.81 


21.13 


8.06 


: 36.98 


9.12 


32.52 


12.87 


1898, 






37.48 


7.70 


43.85 


19.52 


29.98 


8.75 


: 41.95 


8.64 


38.32 


11.15 


1899, 






35.56 


7.52 


45.31 


16.64 


25.55 


8.68 


41.15 


8.19 


36.89 


10.26 


1900, 






35.94 


9.15 


45.99 


24.24 


31.34 


7.67 


1 42.48 


9.32 


38.94 


12.60 


1901, 






38 21 


9.51 


.43.83 


20.63 


19.30 


6.97 


. 44.77 


9.61 


36.53 


11.68 


1902, 






40.42 


8.24 


45.94 


20.62 


24.04 


7.35 


i 49.27 


9.00 


39.92 


11.30 


1903, 






I 42.24 


8.25 


42.59 


16.70 


21.47 


5.07 


45.13 


9.24 


37.86 


9.82 


1904, 






43.35 


8.96 


40.95 


16.12 


20.18 


9.79 


47.30 


11.91 


37.95 


11.70 


1905, 






, 43.49 


9.07 


40.01 


18.48 


23.98 


10.06 


■ 48.58 


10.09 


39.02 


11.93 


1906, 






44.63 


8.91 


35.74 


18.55 


20.87 


6.59 


: 46.90 


10.03 


37.04 


11.02 


1907, 






42.24 


7.80 


31.21 


17.90 


19.31 


6.72 


45.24 


10.88 


34.48 


10.83 


1908, 






47.82 


8.20 


30.79 


20.02 


| 22.88 


12.71 


50.41 


11.42 


37.98 


13.09 


1909, 






1 48.02 


9.39 


33.47 


20.49 


! 23.41 


8.38 


; 50.14 


11.67 


38.76 


12.48 


Average 


20- 


•ears, 


$43.02 


$10.03 


$42.32 


$20.61 


$23.90 


$8.00 


$46.64 


$9.68 


$38.59 


812.08 



1 The State Prison buys in the market all its supplies of every kind, whereas at each of the 
reformatories there is a farm that contributes to the support. All these products are credited 
to the farm and charged to the maintenance account as a matter of bookkeeping, but they have 
not been included here, as the purpose of this table is merely to compare the cost from year to year 
of such articles as are purchased in the open market. 



750 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 



Charitable Institutions. 



YEARS. 


State Farm, 
Bridge- 
water. 


Lyman 

School for 
Boys, West- 
borough. 


State Indus- 
trial School 
for Girls, 
Lancaster. 


State 
Infirmary, 
Tewksbury. 


State 
Sana- 
torium, 
Rutland. 




Food. 


Cloth- 
ing. 


Food. 


Cloth- 
ing. 


Food. 


Cloth- 
ing. 


Food. 


Cloth- 
ing. 


Food. 


1890 






$37.73 


$6.22 


$53.50 


$11.69 


$44.79 


$20.01 


$34.52 


$10.64 


- 


1891 






38.07 


6.21 


57.51 


11-29 


56.95 


18.93 


41.57 


11.29 


- 


1892 






38.08 


7.12 


55.68 


25.54 


58.64 


19.10 


39.64 


8.19 


- 


1893 






33.50 


7.64 


52.77 


.14.70 


44.15 


16.33 


36.41 


8.94 


- 


1894 






32.56 


9.00 


43.90 


17.86 


36.93 


14.60 


32.82 


11.20 


- 


1895 






25.58 


8.00 


37.13 


22.41 


53.85 


23.78 


26.34 


12.78 


- 


1896 






26.54 


7.66 


35.33 


20.00 


39.97 


16.67 


27.05 


12.04 


- 


1897 






28.17 


8.58 


36.71 


13.75 


44.25 


18.03 


27.67 


11.17 


- 


1898 






33.65 


8.47 


43.05 


20.38 


39.46 


17.71 


35.35 


9.99 


- 


1899 






31.24 


8.27 


36.76 


18.57 


34.98 


20.60 


36.15 


10.19 


- 


1900 






27.53 


8.23 


37.01 


23.91 


28.12 


13.05 


40.87 


10.92 


$219.19 


1901 






36.42 


10.00 


37.17 


17.15 


36.26 


17.99 


40.69 


11.52 


196.03 


1902 






36.27 


7.98 


40.95 


20.60 


28.68 


18.73 


42.24 


10.73 


201.18 


1903 






33.47 


10.37 


36.28 


14.69 


29.56 


16.22 


38.42 


9.00 


186.59 


1904 






37.31 


9.26 


39.20 


17.73 


33.93 


19.03 


37.65 


9.33 


171.42 


1905 






36.56 


12.00 


42.37 


18.50 


40.93 


18.55 


37.33 


7.16 


162.99 


1906 


i 




39.69 


11.78 


39.16 


27.53 


36.29 


28.96 


44.01 


12.30 


240.54 


1907 






37.79 


12.20 


41.63 


27.25 


37.95 


21.91 


42.23 


7.70 


251.08 


1908 






42.87 


13.34 


44.19 


24.77 


33.13 


18.71 


47.75 


10.29 


247.52 


1909 






36.07 


12.13 


48.53 


22.11 


34.62 


19.47 


54.31 


14.45 


239.52 


Av., 


20: 


►'ears, 


$34.45 


S9.22 


$42.95 


$19.52 


$39.67 


$18.92 


$38.65 


$10.49 


$211.61 



1 Fourteen months. 

Hospitals and Asylums for Insane. 



Years. 


Food. 


Clothing. 


Year. 


Food. 


Clothing. 


1905, .... 
1906 


$53.79 
50.41 
52.72 


$7.61 
9.27 
8.65 


1908, 

1909, .... 
Annual average, . 


$55.60 
54.92 


$8.76 
8.51 


1907 


$53.49 


$8.56 



Statement by Dr. Owen Copp, Executive Officer, Board of 

Insanity. 

The weekly cost of maintenance at these hospitals and asylums was 
$3.7525 in 1905 and $4.2395 in 1909, — an advance of $0,487 per week, 
or 12.97 per cent, in the five-year period. 

In explanation, it may be said that nearly three-fourths of the total 



1910. 



HOUSE — No. 1750. 



751 



increase of the cost of maintenance was due to shortening- hours of 
labor and raising wages of nurses and employees. The weekly per 
capita expense for salaries, wages and labor was $1.3367 in 1905 and 
$1.6946 in 1909, — an increase of $0.3579 per week, or 73.49 per cent, 
of the total increase of cost of maintenance. 

Food supplies are provided from two sources: (1) products of the 
institution farms, whose cost appears under the heading " Farm, stable 
and grounds " in the classification of maintenance expenses appended 
to this statement; and (2) the articles of food purchased in the market, 
largely at wholesale. 

(1) Farm products may be eliminated in the discussion, inasmuch as 
their value has been practically constant for the period, amounting 
to a weekly per capita of $0,442 in 1909, $0,433 in 1908 and $0,437 
in 1907. 

(2) Food supplies purchased amounted to a weekly per capita cost 
of $1.0345 in 1905 and $1.0561 in 1909, — an advance of $0.0216 per 
week, or 2.09 per cent. This is not quite a fair statement, because the 
cost in 1905 was higher than the average for the two succeeding years, 
as will appear from the tabulation below. 

It would be fairer to take the average cost for 1905, 1906 and 1907, 
which is $1.0059 per week. On this basis there has been an increase 
in the weekly per capita cost of food from $1.0059 to $1.0561 in 1909, 
— an advance of $0.0502 per week, or 4.99 per cent. 

The standard of dietaries of these institutions has risen moderately 
during this period, as evidenced by the comparative bulletins issued 
to them from time to time by the State Board of Insanity. 

The prices of the main food supplies are shown in the following 
table of averages, computed on actual purchases and prices paid dur- 
ing the last three years, prior to which I regret we have no accurate 
data, inasmuch as we began in 1907 to issue comparative price bul- 
letins to our institutions. 



Average Price per Unit. 



SUPPLIES. 


1909. 


1908. 


1907. 


Unit. 


Granulated sugar 


SO. 046 


SO. 050 


SO. 048 


Per pound. 


White flour, 


5.438 


5.305 


4.547 


Per barrel. 


Butter, 


.252 


.249 


.264 


Per pound. 


Eggs 


.229 


.196 


.209 


Per dozen. 


Side of beef 


.083 


.087 


.084 


Per pound. 


Total beef 


.077 


.076 


.070 


Per pound. 


Lamb and veal, 


.096 


.097 


.106 


Per pound. 


Pork 


.096 


.090 


.102 


Per pound. 


Total poultry 


.185 


.163 


.176 


Per pound. 


Total meat 


.085 


.084 


.080 


Per pound. 



752 



COST OF LIVING. 



[May, 1910. 



The price of flour advanced from an average of $4,547 per barrel 
in 1907 to $5,438 in 1909; otherwise there was only a moderate varia- 
tion in prices, notably less than in the retail market. In explanation, 
it should be borne in mind : — 

(1) That most purchases were made at wholesale. 

(2) That competitive buying increased much during this period. 

(3) That competitive price bulletins began to be issued monthly to 
these institutions by the State Board of Insanity in 1907. 

(4) That discounts for cash payments within ten days began to be 
made to the institutions at about the same time. 

It may be of interest to review the following comparative analysis 
of average weekly per capita expenses of maintenance for the last 
five years, which, outside of salaries, wages and labor, and food, shows 
only moderate variation during the five-year period : — 



Weekly Per Capita Cost of Maintenance, Hospitals and Asylums, 1905-09. 





1909. i 


1908. 


1907. 


1906. 


1905. 


Average number of patients cared for, 


9,486 


8,240 


7,799 


7,678 


7,466 


Salaries, wages and labor, . 


$1.6946 


$1.6621 


$1.5393 


$1.4481 


$1.3367 


Food, 


1.0561 


1.0693 


1.0138 


.9695 


1.0345 


Clothing and clothing material, 


.1637 


.1684 


.1863 


.1783 


.1464 


Furnishings, 


.1745 


.1598 


.1599 


.1575 


.1463 


Heat, light and power, 


.3664 


.3807 


.3682 


.3665 


.3101 


Repairs and improvements, 


.2415 


2228 


.2266 


.2559 


.2446 


Farm, stable and grounds, 


.2962 


.3135 


.2881 


.2947 


.2886 


Miscellaneous, ..... 


.2465 


.2487 


.2503 


.3059 


.2453 


Whole weekly per capita cost, . 


84.2395 


$4.2253 


$4.0125 


$3.9764 


$3.7525 



1 The Boston State Hospital became a State institution December 1, 1908, and appears for 
the first time in this average in 1909, adding 767 patients. 



AUG 1 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS # 



019 566 876 



